Graham Dwyer court case *READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING*

Stheno

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Did his family support him through the trial and beyond??? Link.

His father brother and sister attended the trial

tayto lover

Roquentin wrote: »

yea, but couldnt they have seen the texts from elaines phone as in they check her phone records

They may well have but they had no link to Dwyer as he bought the master phone in a ficticious name.

Dwarf.Shortage

Roquentin wrote: »

yea, but couldnt they have seen the texts from elaines phone as in they check her phone records

Yes but they would have been to said untraceable phone? the two pay as you go phones in question were found side by side in the reservoir like, the issue was figuring out who had used them.

Dwarf.Shortage

tayto lover wrote: »

They may well have but they had no link to Dwyer as he bought the master phone in a ficticious name.

Easy as that sounds it wouldn't even have been that difficult. Pay cash in the shop and they won't ask for your details, you're asked to go online and register your sim. If you neglect to do that they haven't a notion who's using the phone.

Spanish Eyes

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Did his family support him through the trial and beyond??? Link.

Eh I know it's the Sunday World, but whatever.

http://www.sundayworld.com/news/crimedesk/loyal-dad-visits-dwyer-on-first-day-of-life-sentence

realdanbreen

Roquentin wrote: »

yea, but couldnt they have seen the texts from elaines phone as in they check her phone records

He wasn't texting her regular phone he was texting the pay as you go phone that he threw in the reservoir( I'd say he kicks himself every single day for being too stupid to destroy those phones,bondage gear etc)

tayto lover

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Did his family support him through the trial and beyond??? Link.

His father said today that he was standing by his son.

Roquentin

realdanbreen wrote: »

He wasn't texting her regular phone he was texting the pay as you go phone that he threw in the reservoir( I'd say he kicks himself every single day for being too stupid to destroy those phones,bondage gear etc)

that makes sense.

only for the heatwave

Roquentin

tayto lover wrote: »

His father said today that he was standing by his son.

family members have a habit of doing that. jeffrey dahmers father stood by him and if you think dwyer is bad, dahmer is ten times worse

Spanish Eyes

The most bizarre aspect of this, with due respect to Dwyer's wife and family, was the way he conducted his "knife and murder fetish" silently to everyone who knew him.

Scary that someone can lead a double life without ANYONE beings suspicious.

How do they do that?

Dwarf.Shortage

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The most bizarre aspect of this, with due respect to Dwyer's wife and family, was the way he conducted his "knife and murder fetish" silently to everyone who knew him.

Scary that someone can lead a double life without ANYONE beings suspicious.

How do they do that?

One would imagine his wife knew his sexual tendencies weren't exactly vanilla but had no idea of the degree to which they deviated from normal. He had brought a knife into the bedroom in an earlier relationship that had been serious enough to produce a child and I'd imagine after that lead to it turning sour he was more guarded with what he revealed to his wife. I doubt he could quite pull off the charade of being an everyday few-quick-pumps-then-a-cuddle merchant but I would imagine he hid it to a reasonable degree.

realdanbreen

tayto lover wrote: »

His father said today that he was standing by his son.

I know he is his father and all that but I think its a bit rich for him to be saying that. Even if he thinks the son is innocent is he condoning the sadistic way he brutalised that woman,and others? And what exactly does he mean by ;standing by his son' . Does he think he is innocent? If so he should come straight out and say that.

K4t

I'm sure he has seen all the evidence and knows his son is guilty, but he's still not going to simply desert him or disown him, which is understandable. He probably remembers his son as a child and all the good memories and wonders how it got to this. Perhaps he blames himself in some way? Who knows.

Spanish Eyes

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

One would imagine his wife knew his sexual tendencies weren't exactly vanilla but had no idea of the degree to which they deviated from normal. He had brought a knife into the bedroom in an earlier relationship that had been serious enough to produce a child and I'd imagine after that lead to it turning sour he was more guarded with what he revealed to his wife. I doubt he could quite pull off the charade of being an everyday few-quick-pumps-then-a-cuddle merchant but I would imagine he hid it to a reasonable degree.

I would suggest that at home it certainly WAS vanilla, and normal. Part of the plan!

Devious little bstard.

realdanbreen

K4t wrote: »

I'm sure he has seen all the evidence and knows his son is guilty, but he's still not going to simply desert him or disown him, which is understandable. He probably remembers his son as a child and all the good memories and wonders how it got to this. Perhaps he blames himself in some way? Who knows.

Fair enough but perhaps if his first statement on the matter was to express sadness for what happened to EOH rather than saying he was standing by his son it might be a bit more appropriate.

Spanish Eyes

realdanbreen wrote: »

I know he is his father and all that but I think its a bit rich for him to be saying that. Even if he thinks the son is innocent is he condoning the sadistic way he brutalised that woman,and others? And what exactly does he mean by ;standing by his son' . Does he think he is innocent? If so he should come straight out and say that.

It is probably the father's way of dealing with it. Denial. For his own sake, as the truth is too much to bear.

Spanish Eyes

realdanbreen wrote: »

Fair enough but perhaps if his first statement on the matter was to express sadness for what happened to EOH rather than saying he was standing by his son it might be a bit more appropriate.

Did Dwyer's father, or family make any statement?

As far as I recall, only Graham Dwyer made a statement, and he made no reference to the person he killed or her family either in that statement.

I cannot understand how a convicted killer is allowed to make any statement in the first place. They should be taken to prison and that is that. The jury has spoken.

Dwarf.Shortage

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Did Dwyer's father, or family make any statement?

As far as I recall, only Graham Dwyer made a statement, and he made no reference to the person he killed or her family either in that statement.

I cannot understand how a convicted killer is allowed to make any statement in the first place. They should be taken to prison and that is that. The jury has spoken.

One isn't afforded some specific right to make a statement, if he was taken straight to prison he could have just written his thoughts down and sent them to family or someone in the media to make public. He isn't afforded time to speak in the courtroom after he is convicted or anything like that, most likely he informed his legal team of what he wanted released in the case he was convicted.

Spanish Eyes

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

One isn't afforded some specific right to make a statement, if he was taken straight to prison he could have just written his thoughts down and sent them to family or someone in the media to make public. He isn't afforded time to speak in the courtroom after he is convicted or anything like that, most likely he informed his legal team of what he wanted released in the case he was convicted.

Egotistical so and so!

brooke 2

Roquentin wrote: »

yea, but couldnt they have seen the texts from elaines phone as in they check her phone records

The initial investigation was as poor as the subsequent one was excellent.

brooke 2

tayto lover wrote: »

They may well have but they had no link to Dwyer as he bought the master phone in a ficticious name.

When EOH downloaded her list of phone contacts onto her computer, her text messages were also downloaded. Graham
Dwyer's name and some of her messages to him were among
those.

brooke 2

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The most bizarre aspect of this, with due respect to Dwyer's wife and family, was the way he conducted his "knife and murder fetish" silently to everyone who knew him.

Scary that someone can lead a double life without ANYONE beings suspicious.

How do they do that?

Somebody was suspicious. When EOH's remains were found, the Gardai received an anonymous message directing them to Graham Dwyer. He is said to have attacked someone about twenty
years ago - this incident went unreported. The mother of his first child was allegedly terrified of him and was in court on the day the jury announced the verdict, much to her relief.

Allyall

K4t wrote: »

What's odd is that I was obviously joking about wanting links to the porn he had on his pc (though I wouldn't mind having a look at them!), but I'm not sure you're joking about wanting him tortured; nor are many others in this thread. It's quite revealing.

Not obvious at all, you even said you wanted it for 'research' purposes. and just repeated that you wouldn't mind having a look at them...
You bullsh*tted in the same sentence..
His fetish, was to injure, maim, stab and murder someone. He wasn't forced (blackmail, debt, anger, drugs, revenge, etc.), he literally got turned on by it, and he chose someone who had obvious problems.
So, no, I would have no sympathy for him.
And to be completely honest, I find your posts a lot more revealing.

K4t wrote: »

I don't look for kicks when discussing a person's murder. I don't look for the murderer to be tortured either, no matter how evil he might be.

You were looking for something.

K4t wrote: »

They're pornographic videos afaik. Not real I hope. I don't like anybody being tortured, prisoners or otherwise.

Then why would you want to see them? Why even ask? Joking?

tayto lover wrote: »

Dwyer was texting from an untraceable phone and was only linked to him after it was recovered from the reservoir.

Roquentin wrote: »

yea, but couldnt they have seen the texts from elaines phone as in they check her phone records

He bought both phones, gave her one 'untraceable' and he used the other.
Afaik, he called them 'master' and 'slave' phones.

Mallagio

You get the feeling with this fella that this case is tip of his sick iceberg.... don't ya??

Allyall

Mallagio wrote: »

You get the feeling with this fella that this case is tip of his sick iceberg.... don't ya??

Yep.
I don't have the slightest clue how these things are harvested or kept etc..
But I would have investigated every step he took for the last 20+ years and investigated any murder/rape/disappearance and cross examined them.

His ex said he brought a knife to bed 20 years ago, so he had these feelings brewing for quite a while. He seemed very sure of himself he'd get away with this. I'd be willing to guess he may have done something else similar at least once before.

EDIT - Even earlier apparently

But I would obviously be just speculating.

Mallagio

Allyall wrote: »

Yep.
I don't have the slightest clue how these things are harvested or kept etc..
But I would have investigated every step he took for the last 20+ years and investigated any murder/rape/disappearance and cross examined them.

His ex said he brought a knife to bed 20 years ago, so he had these feelings brewing for quite a while. He seemed very sure of himself he'd get away with this. I'd be willing to guess he may have done something else similar at least once before.

But I would obviously be just speculating.

Exactamundo! - said the exact same thing to my missus tonight.

People like to try find out why he's like this, want to know whether his daddy was at fault & all that jazz..... Sometimes folk are evil & it's nobody's fault.

Allyall

There was some case in Wales I saw a true crime programme in the 90's. I can't remember the details, but the basic story was, some guy was involved in an accident, he saw somebody die, and realised that he liked it, or got some sort of fetish thrill from it..

Anyway, later on, he ended up being convicted for a murder, and they suspect him of a few more.
It was years ago I watched it, and I have searched every now and then to find it, but with no luck.

Something must have been triggered in that guy, and he liked it so much he wanted to regain/revive that feeling.
i.e. - Nothing to do with "his daddy & all that jazz" or anyone else he grew up with. (I know that's what you were saying.. But I was trying to remember that episode, and relate it to it.)

sabat

ncmc wrote: »

The more I hear about this case, the more I am staggered he didn’t put in a plea of manslaughter or assisted suicide...

...It was a very risky move to plead not guilty, it was always going to be an all or nothing situation. Either he was going to walk away a free man or spend the rest of his life in jail. I think it says a lot about the man that his sense of being untouchable probably has caused him to be locked away for the rest of his life.

Being uber-cynical (and I don't believe this to be true) he should have said that they were just "playing their normal game" but it went wrong and she died and he panicked and covered it up to protect his reputation. Plead guilty to manslaughter and associated charges and he'd be out in 5 years or less. After all, he did have the perfect defence in videos of Ms O'Hara willingly partaking in these activities with him. Like you said, he was such an arrogant disassociated prick that he failed to see the reality of the situation in front of him.

bjork

Were other things belonging to a Gardai?/person unknown? also found in the lake?

stickybookmark

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I would suggest that at home it certainly WAS vanilla, and normal. Part of the plan!

Devious little bstard.

I read in the paper that the prosecution didn't question Gemma Dwyer about her husband's sexual tendancies because it 'wouldn't have helped their case' implying that he didn't show his true colours to her I'd imagine

stickybookmark

realdanbreen wrote: »

Fair enough but perhaps if his first statement on the matter was to express sadness for what happened to EOH rather than saying he was standing by his son it might be a bit more appropriate.

In fairness I'd leave that man alone. Who knows how any of us would react if our child did something like that. I don't think the Sunday world should be taking photos of him! I'd imagine as a parent he thinks GD is a suicide risk if absolutely no-one stands by him/visits him. GD will already be enduring possibly never seeing his 2 kids again etc....the father probably thinks someone has to stand by him, bad egg and all that he is

PARlance

sabat wrote: »

Being uber-cynical (and I don't believe this to be true) he should have said that they were just "playing their normal game" but it went wrong and she died and he panicked and covered it up to protect his reputation. Plead guilty to manslaughter and associated charges and he'd be out in 5 years or less. After all, he did have the perfect defence in videos of Ms O'Hara willingly partaking in these activities with him. Like you said, he was such an arrogant disassociated prick that he failed to see the reality of the situation in front of him.

He would almost certainly be facing a lot less time if he had went that route. Glad he wasn't as smart as he thinks he is. It's hard to imagine it now but I'm sure public sentiment towards him would be very different too... A wierd fetish that two people were partaking in that went horribly wrong.

Glad he didn't decide to go down that route but it's scary to think that he could have gotten away with it (in a sense obviously) be pleading manslaughther and shaping a case around that.

ncmc

sabat wrote: »

Being uber-cynical (and I don't believe this to be true) he should have said that they were just "playing their normal game" but it went wrong and she died and he panicked and covered it up to protect his reputation. Plead guilty to manslaughter and associated charges and he'd be out in 5 years or less. After all, he did have the perfect defence in videos of Ms O'Hara willingly partaking in these activities with him. Like you said, he was such an arrogant disassociated prick that he failed to see the reality of the situation in front of him.

I just watched The Jinx last week about Robert Durst (couldn't recommend highly enough btw) and the similarities between the two men are striking. Both egotistical with a sense of superiority who feel they're the smartest men in the room. Both with an ability to be charming and bare faced lie with impunity. I suppose it's the characteristic of a sociopath and in both cases it caused their undoing. Durst by contacting the filmmakers and doing interviews has totally shot himself in the foot. Dwyer by 100% believing he would get off has missed the chance of a plea bargain and a possibly much lighter sentence.

ectoraige

MouseTail wrote: »

Justice not only needs to be done in public, it needs to be seen to be done. Had this case been conducted behind closed doors, the public would have been dissatisfied the conviction was safe. It was all the small details that added up which led the jury to convict.

I'm not saying it should be behind closed doors, I'm just saying there is no need for salicious daily bulletins of selected evidence while the trial is still ongoing. All the details could still have been reported upon conclusion of the trial and justice would still be seen to be done.

Dwarf.Shortage

ectoraige wrote: »

I'm not saying it should be behind closed doors, I'm just saying there is no need for salicious daily bulletins of selected evidence while the trial is still ongoing. All the details could still have been reported upon conclusion of the trial and justice would still be seen to be done.

People get very antsy when one starts trying to control when or what the media can and can't report, the fourth estate and all that.

seamus

Just in terms of all the questions about how long it took and evidence and such, from reading between the lines it seems pretty clear that Dwyer was high on the Gardai's list after Elaine's disappearance, but without a body or any substantial evidence, there was no murder investigation and therefore bringing in Dwyer for questioning would have been very flimsy and could have caused him to take further steps to cover his tracks.

Sometimes not alerting a suspect is the best thing to do as they will become complacent as the case gets colder.

When the phones were found, things pretty much took off. Pretty quickly, the Gardai were at Dwyer's bins collecting DNA evidence even though they hadn't yet analysed the data on the phones. It seems clear to me that a number of Gardai strongly suspected Dwyer had killed her but lacked the evidence to go any further. Elaine's body and the phones gave the investigation the shot in the arm it needed.

It's also worth mentioning that while data had been synced from Elaine's phone, it wasn't a complete timeline and wouldn't have had the last few texts sent. The two phones were dedicated for that purpose - it wasn't Elaine's main phone. So without the actual phones the Gardai were at something of a loss. They had part of the texts, but no phone and therefore no way to trace her movements (or indeed, his)
And from the perspective of investigating a suicide, the texts could be seen as looking bad but not necessarily pointing towards murder.

I remember seeing questions at the time (and asking similar ones myself) about why the Gardai were re-examining Elaine's computer when her body was found, but in hindsight it's pretty clear why.

Stheno

Seamus there was a lot of reporting that Dwyer was only even identified after the phones were found through texts that referred to him competing in a flying club and coming fifth

Where are you getting the info that gardai knew of him at the time of Elaine s disappearance?

ohnonotgmail

Stheno wrote: »

Seamus there was a lot of reporting that Dwyer was only even identified after the phones were found through texts that referred to him competing in a flying club and coming fifth

Where are you getting the info that gardai knew of him at the time of Elaine s disappearance?

was he not shown on the CCTV in elaines apartment block regularly entering and exiting?

seamus

Stheno wrote: »

Where are you getting the info that gardai knew of him at the time of Elaine s disappearance?

Really because of this:

The investigation team first found Graham Dwyer on 27 September, the same day as the officer leading the investigation, their boss, unknown to them all, went with another detective to Dwyer’s home.

It was 5am and the Dwyer family had put their bins out on the footpath to be emptied that day. The two detectives searched Dwyer's bins and found a can of turtlewax. They took it away and sent it for DNA analysis.

A week earlier on 20 September and just three days after the incident room had been set up in Blackrock, Detective Chief Superintendent Diarmuid O'Sullivan received confidential information on Graham Dwyer.

Now, it might just be that someone knew Dwyer & O'Hara were having a relationship, but didn't come forward until her remains were identified on 17th September.

But I've had a suspicion that there was more there than Gardai want to let on, for operational reasons.

Stheno

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

was he not shown on the CCTV in elaines apartment block regularly entering and exiting?

Yes but that's not the same as knowing who he is?

murpho999

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

was he not shown on the CCTV in elaines apartment block regularly entering and exiting?

People enter apartment blocks all the time.

Gardai can't make their move until they have evidence.

CCTV showed him with a bag that was later found in the reservoir. That was evidence.

I don't know why the gardai are being scrutinised here when they have did an outstanding job and got a conviction.

ohnonotgmail

murpho999 wrote: »

People enter apartment blocks all the time.

Gardai can't make their move until they have evidence.

CCTV showed him with a bag that was later found in the reservoir. That was evidence.

I don't know why the gardai are being scrutinised here when they have did an outstanding job and got a conviction.

All true but they knew he didnt live there so that would make him a person of interest.

Neyite

seamus wrote: »

Really because of this:
Now, it might just be that someone knew Dwyer & O'Hara were having a relationship, but didn't come forward until her remains were identified on 17th September.

But I've had a suspicion that there was more there than Gardai want to let on, for operational reasons.

On the primetime special the day he was convicted, the superintendent said that they'd had an anonymous tip off that named him as being in a relationship with EOH. That's why they were able to pounce right away getting his dna from his bins upon identification of the loyalty card /remains.

murpho999

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

All true but they knew he didnt live there so that would make him a person of interest.

But they probably didn't knew who he was until the bag and phones were found.

Sometimes they have to bide their time too.

Arresting him too early can blow a case too or give a suspect time to hide evidence or flee if released without charge.

take everything

It does make you wonder though about how much the internet facilitates perversion.

Yeah it's not fashionable to question the roles of porn in shaping thought/behaviour but I found myself not reflexively dismissing my mother's "the internet has them all ruined” mantra when discussing this over the Sunday papers

Time will tell I guess.
Over the next 20 years, I just hope guys growing up with crazier and crazier (read violent, misogynistic stuff) porn will be OK.

kylith

take everything wrote: »

It does make you wonder though about how much the internet facilitates perversion.

Yeah it's not fashionable to question the roles of porn in shaping thought/behaviour but I found myself not reflexively dismissing my mother's "the internet has them all ruined” mantra when discussing this over the Sunday papers

Time will tell I guess.
Over the next 20 years, I just hope guys growing up with crazier and crazier (read violent, misogynistic stuff) porn will be OK.

The Marquis de Sade was doing this kind of stuff 200 years before the internet.

ohnonotgmail

kylith wrote: »

The Marquis de Sade was doing this kind of stuff 200 years before the internet.

much worse stuff.

Allyall

I don't know why, but I also thought the Gardaí knew of him long before her remains were found.
It appears not.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0327/690272-garda-case-against-graham-dwyer/

They knew from Elaine's computer that his name was Graham.
They also knew he was an architect who was married with children who was disgusted by smoking and interested in expensive cars and flying.
They checked all the airlines and pilots but could not find a match until on the evening of 27 September, Detective Colm Cregan suggested to Detective Jim Mulligan that maybe they should look at people flying model aeroplanes.
Det Cregan thought of this because he had previously seen enthusiasts flying their planes in the Wicklow mountains.

When detectives Mulligan and Cregan checked the website for the Aeronautic Council of Ireland, pieces of the information they had already gathered began to match information on the website.
They found an architect, who was married with two children with a great interest in model planes whose name was Graham.
They called in their sergeant, Peter Woods, who, when he saw what they had found, said: "You might just have something there lads!" They had found Graham Dwyer.
The investigation team first found Graham Dwyer on 27 September, the same day as the officer leading the investigation, their boss, unknown to them all, went with another detective to Dwyer’s home.
It was 5am and the Dwyer family had put their bins out on the footpath to be emptied that day. The two detectives searched Dwyer's bins and found a can of turtlewax. They took it away and sent it for DNA analysis.
A week earlier on 20 September and just three days after the incident room had been set up in Blackrock, Detective Chief Superintendent Diarmuid O'Sullivan received confidential information on Graham Dwyer.

I must have convinced myself that I read somewhere, that they were aware of his existence, but had to wait to find a body..

Roquentin

take everything wrote: »

It does make you wonder though about how much the internet facilitates perversion.

Yeah it's not fashionable to question the roles of porn in shaping thought/behaviour but I found myself not reflexively dismissing my mother's "the internet has them all ruined” mantra when discussing this over the Sunday papers

Time will tell I guess.
Over the next 20 years, I just hope guys growing up with crazier and crazier (read violent, misogynistic stuff) porn will be OK.

what happens with porn is that it becomes an addiction. just like an alcoholic who needs to drink more to get the same high, the user of porn needs more extreme porn to get the same high.

Like everything in life, moderation is the key.

I actually said to a friend that their will be an epidemic of porn addicts in the future. ok, maybe not an epidemic, but certainly an increase. there is so much of it on the internet and available for free. its becoming the drug of choice

brooke 2

seamus wrote: »

Really because of this:
Now, it might just be that someone knew Dwyer & O'Hara were having a relationship, but didn't come forward until her remains were identified on 17th September.

But I've had a suspicion that there was more there than Gardai want to let on, for operational reasons.

Iirc, Chief Superintendent O'Sullivan said they had received an anonymous tip off
directing them to GD 'who worked in the Baggot Street area'. Apparently, he had attacked a woman twenty years previously but the incident had not been reported
to the gardaí. As a result of the tip off, O'Sullivan conducted the search of GD's bins
in which they found turtle wax.