Graham Dwyer court case *READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING*

Grayson

Aineoil wrote: »

Don't worry Mr Grayson, it's only one friend in common.

Thankfully the common friend isn't called Dwyer

Aineoil

Grayson wrote: »

Thankfully the common friend isn't called Dwyer

Actually I wonder if he had friends? What do they think about him now?

Ash.J.Williams

i hope no single people feel bad that graham can score in a max security prison!

Stheno

His new woman sounds seriously disturbed

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/woman-in-love-with-graham-dwyer-banned-from-prison-visits-31302387.html

She told GSOC she became pregnant after a brief tryst with the officer in a car in Ballymun.

It was claimed that the married garda bought illegal abortion pills on the internet and asked that she take them.

She said she pretended to take the first of five abortion pills when she met the officer in Dublin city centre after she told him of her pregnancy.

And she claimed she kept the pill in her mouth while pretending to swallow it.

Andreenkova alleged in her statement that she felt intimidated by the garda and that he threatened her with deportation when she refused to have an abortion.

Despite an extensive GSOC investigation, the garda watchdog has failed to either bring charges against the officer in question or to clear his name.

Andreenkova last year rang Taoiseach Enda Kenny to report her 'breast pump' had been stolen by Fine Gael.

During the call, Mr Kenny was left speechless after he was told a Fine Gael party member stole the pump.

"I am very, very angry at your government because a Fine Gael member stole it," she said.

Menas

Stheno wrote: »

His new woman sounds seriously disturbed

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/woman-in-love-with-graham-dwyer-banned-from-prison-visits-31302387.html

Poor Enda, dealing with allegedly stolen breast pumps is not what he would be used to.

But back on topic, yeah, this woman sounds like a right loo laa. I wonder what she was wearing that led to her getting 'barred' from visiting him?

Flippyfloppy

Stheno wrote: »

His new woman sounds seriously disturbed

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/woman-in-love-with-graham-dwyer-banned-from-prison-visits-31302387.html

Not that we needed any more evidence....

LadyFenghuang

Stheno wrote: »

His new woman sounds seriously disturbed

OH MY GOD!

Ash.J.Williams

The woman needs help and i'm sure media are not helping her situation. The freaky thing about that indo article is that it seems GD is potentially up to his old tricks again.

Galwayguy35

It's the Garda I feel sorry for having his good name ruined by that nutcase.

She's Russian so sent her back where she came from.

Roquentin

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

It's the Garda I feel sorry for having his good name ruined by that nutcase.

She's Russian so sent her back where she came from.

along with her breast pumps

LadyFenghuang

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

The woman needs help and i'm sure media are not helping her situation. The freaky thing about that indo article is that it seems GD is potentially up to his old tricks again.

He should be stopped in prison. No contact with people outside.

Greenmachine

He should be given zero visitation rights. No good can come out of a fella as twisted as that.

michael999999

Menas wrote: »

Poor Enda, dealing with allegedly stolen breast pumps is not what he would be used to.

But back on topic, yeah, this woman sounds like a right loo laa. I wonder what she was wearing that led to her getting 'barred' from visiting him?

I'd be surprised if Kenny didn't get a pump for Denis o Brien, for those nights Kenny can't be in Malta!

michael999999

Greenmachine wrote: »

He should be given zero visitation rights. No good can come out of a fella as twisted as that.

She has since been banned from visiting!

LadyFenghuang

michael999999 wrote: »

She has since been banned from visiting!

He shouldn't be allowed visits.

tayto lover

A friend of mine always says that if you let two nutcases out on each side of the city they'll meet in the middle.
Nutcases seem to have a magnitism for each other.

ncmc

Menas wrote: »

But back on topic, yeah, this woman sounds like a right loo laa. I wonder what she was wearing that led to her getting 'barred' from visiting him?

I think she turned up in full leather gear :eek:

Stheno

ncmc wrote: »

I think she turned up in full leather gear :eek:

That was in court apparently

He has her under his thumb, in the indo article she said she'd have to ask him if it was alright that she changed her facebook status!

seamus

To paraphrase someone on Reddit:

"If you never have any luck with the ladies, just murder one and go to jail and you'll have women banging down the door to come in and see you".

Some women are just properly off their biccie. I'm not sure if the same phenomenon exists for female murderers.

I imagine if someone with serious mental issues was really into the whole sub/dom thing, they could see a male dom who murdered their sub as being the ultimate dom to get involved with.

But yeah, the rag papers are doing this woman no favours by giving her the air of publicity. She needs to be put into care for her own protection.

Roquentin

seamus wrote: »

To paraphrase someone on Reddit:

"If you never have any luck with the ladies, just murder one and go to jail and you'll have women banging down the door to come in and see you".

Some women are just properly off their biccie. I'm not sure if the same phenomenon exists for female murderers.

I imagine if someone with serious mental issues was really into the whole sub/dom thing, they could see a male dom who murdered their sub as being the ultimate dom to get involved with.

But yeah, the rag papers are doing this woman no favours by giving her the air of publicity. She needs to be put into care for her own protection.

I'm reading this article in the paper a few years ago about Ted Bundy the mass murderer:

"Ted Bundy's On Trial In Florida for killing 24 women - the courtroom is filled with women trying to meet him and give him love letters and wedding proposals."

I'm sorry to say that the first thing I thought when I read that was "And I'm not getting laid! What am I doing wrong?" So I read another article in the paper: "Woman is suing the state of Wisconsin." Why would anyone sue the state of Wisconsin? Well, she married a fella on death row. Why's he on death row? He killed 8 women. [No, there's more] He has aids, she married him and is suing the state for the rights of CONJUGAL VISITS. Now I'm sorry to say the first thing that crossed my mind when I read that was "And I'm not getting laid!" Hey, what exactly are you ladies looking for here? These guys must have been heavy on that sense of humor thing you seem to love so much in your little ladies polls. "Ted Bundy that old whip! He's hilarious! Something of the things Ted would do, he kills me! Oh what a sense of humor he had. I overlooked the mass murder thing 'cause he kept me in stitches!"

-- Bill Hicks

Egginacup

Lisha wrote: »

Words fail me. There really is no shortage of idiots in this world:(

I don't think "idiot" would describe her. Psychopath or nutcase is a bit more apt.

NachoBusiness

seamus wrote: »

To paraphrase someone on Reddit:

"If you never have any luck with the ladies, just murder one and go to jail and you'll have women banging down the door to come in and see you".

Some women are just properly off their biccie. I'm not sure if the same phenomenon exists for female murderers.

The phenomena can be seen in it's full unsettling glory with the attention Oscar Pistorius receives.

John_Rambo

silverfeather wrote: »

Actually I doubt he ever really appreciated them. Sociopaths only think of immediate needs and their perverse desires. They were items to him. Stars or notches on his belt. He could care less about his kids. They were his trophies. They were apart of the film of which he was the star. They were not separate beings with their own feelings and rights to him. They were a sign that he was 'normal' that he was a success. That's all..

Just spotted this. Right.. great, insightful post, never looked at it that way!

silverfeather wrote: »

You cannot love your children and be a murderer you just can't

I had a real problem with this part, but thinking about it, I suppose you're right when it comes to this type of murder as apposed to a revenge or act of passion murder... I'd say you'd (rightly) put Joe O'Reilly in the same category? Pity you closed your account. Excellent posts.

micar

Does anyone think it's odd the state pathologist came out and that based on the lack of physical evidence that she was surprised that he was found guilty?

Surely as he's going to lodge an appeal that she should have kept her opinion to herself especially as she was the pathologist on the case ( I think)

Stheno

micar wrote: »

Does anyone think it's odd the state pathologist came out and that based on the lack of physical evidence that she was surprised that he was found guilty?

Surely as he's going to lodge an appeal that she should have kept her opinion to herself especially as she was the pathologist on the case ( I think)

I thought it was downright bizarre as an employee of the state but her premise is correct they had nothing on the evidence from the body

I also thought he would be acquitted

Tin Foil Hat

micar wrote: »

Does anyone think it's odd the state pathologist came out and that based on the lack of physical evidence that she was surprised that he was found guilty?

Surely as he's going to lodge an appeal that she should have kept her opinion to herself especially as she was the pathologist on the case ( I think)

I saw this in the examiner today. Couldn't believe what I was reading. The state pathologist undermining his conviction while an appeal of that conviction is ongoing!? Her job should be in question, in my opinion.

Flippyfloppy

I'm guessing it was a misquote, or taken completely out of context as an example of forensic evidence not always being needed.

evolving_doors

micar wrote: »

Does anyone think it's odd the state pathologist came out and that based on the lack of physical evidence that she was surprised that he was found guilty?

Surely as he's going to lodge an appeal that she should have kept her opinion to herself especially as she was the pathologist on the case ( I think)

I think it was an off the record remark to someone in general conversation either before or after a speech. But if im wrong and it was knowingly to be put on the record by her ,then it was a bit ofd for her to be putting out her opinion.

realdanbreen

Stheno wrote: »

I thought it was downright bizarre as an employee of the state but her premise is correct they had nothing on the evidence from the body

I also thought he would be acquitted

But he wasn't convicted on the pathologists evidence he was convicted on a host of other circumstancial evidence. I had no doubdt that he was guilty and would be convicted.

mocha please!

micar wrote: »

Does anyone think it's odd the state pathologist came out and that based on the lack of physical evidence that she was surprised that he was found guilty?

Surely as he's going to lodge an appeal that she should have kept her opinion to herself especially as she was the pathologist on the case ( I think)

It strikes me as odd, and as extremely unprofessional on her part. I'm guessing she made an off-the-cuff remark, not expecting to be quoted on it, but she should have known better than to make any remark on the outcome of such a high-profile case.

I can't imagine that he can use it towards his appeal, though. I mean, she's only made the remarks now, so it's not like he can claim that it affected the jury's opinions in any way (and even if it had, it would have been in his favour.) If he were to somehow use it towards his appeal, it's likely that she'd clarify her opinion - that it was a good thing that circumstantial evidence can be used towards a successful conviction, even in the absence of forensic evidence.

You really would think she'd have known better to go opening that can of worms though! If asked about it, she should have just declined to give an opinion and moved on.

Raging_Ninja

Graham Dwyer wasn't and couldnt have been found guilty based on medical evidence since the medical evidence was inconclusive.

There was only a skeleton left, and no evidence of wounds to the skeleton. We think she was stabbed to death, but there is no actual proof of that.

Don't see how anything Marie Cassidy says could affect any appeal.

tara73

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

I saw this in the examiner today. Couldn't believe what I was reading. The state pathologist undermining his conviction while an appeal of that conviction is ongoing!? Her job should be in question, in my opinion.

simple as: any article in the media about the gd case gets attention and consequently money. worked.

Samaris

As regards State Pathologist Marie Cassidy, she was giving a lecture "to staff medical students at the Post Graduate Centre at University Hospital Limerick, [and afterwards] Professor Cassidy described the case as "fascinating" when she was asked her medical opinion of the two month trial that gripped the nation.

The State pathologist recalled examining the remains of Elaine O'Hara's along with her other colleagues.

"We knew there was no pathology evidence to support anything so it came to what other evidence did they have, and it's up to them to make a case and to present this case, and if they think the case is going to stand up in court then the DPP will go ahead with it.

"In that case, I thought no, they will not go ahead with it... and then when we were waiting for the verdict coming in I said, it has to be not guilty, " she admitted."


Technically it was public, but it was in a rather specific set of circumstances, to students who might in the future be faced with similar situations. It was probably inappropriate to comment on a case that still had to go for appeal, but I can see how it happened. If she was asked "Did you think that he wouldn't be convicted given there wasn't enough evidence left to show cause of death?", probably the best thing to say would be something along the lines of "I can't comment on that", but then again, that would have been picked up too. "State Pathologist refuses to comment on whether her lack of evidence means Graham Dwyer was guilty" or words to that effect.

Eh. I don't see it making much difference in the long run.

I'd love if there was somewhere with a summing-up of the evidence against Dwyer because I heard nothing compelling on the news when the case was on.

seamus

An opinion expressed by anyone when they're not under cross-examination or Garda questioning would not be admissible as evidence.

Assuming Dr. Cassidy didn't write the article, then it's legally little more than hearsay.

Menas

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd love if there was somewhere with a summing-up of the evidence against Dwyer because I heard nothing compelling on the news when the case was on.

In the days after the guilty verdict was delivered there was a good show on RTE1, primetime I think, that walked us thru a lot of the evidence, interviewed some of the Garda involved etc.
It was a good summing up of the evidence, showing its relevancy etc....

Ash.J.Williams

he's trying to overturn the ban on his russian woman from visiting, said she's his new missus!

Riskymove

realdanbreen wrote: »

But he wasn't convicted on the pathologists evidence he was convicted on a host of other circumstancial evidence.

exactly

no pathology was presented as evidence - they could not prove cause of death etc. This is simply a fact repeated by the Pathologist

If this was a reason not to convict then the Judge would have directed it to be so.

Roquentin

paul williams has a new book out

Odelay

Roquentin wrote: »

paul williams has a new book out

I'll stay clear of the fiction section .....

John_Rambo

Odelay wrote: »

I'll stay clear of the fiction section .....

He's very very tight with the Gardai. (I was at a book launch of his a few years ago and every top cop was there from the Commissioner down) I'd say he got the full low down, everything they know about Dwyer.

Menas

Ms Andreenkova was on the radio last night. She says that he is innocent and a "Very, very kind human being. He has lots of talents... he's very intelligent"

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/graham-dwyers-girlfriend-he-is-a-very-kind-human-being-i-would-trust-him-with-my-life-31325580.html

Pass the bucket.

Ash.J.Williams

heard some of that last night....crazy sh1t

aphex™

Roquentin wrote: »

paul williams has a new book out

Or get the book from somebody who was there every day of the trial.

https://twitter.com/Crackingcrime/status/613610334381809664

nokia69

aphex™ wrote: »

Or get the book from somebody who was there every day of the trial.

Hi Niamh

alchemist33

Menas wrote: »

Ms Andreenkova was on the radio last night. She says that he is innocent and a "Very, very kind human being. He has lots of talents... he's very intelligent"

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/graham-dwyers-girlfriend-he-is-a-very-kind-human-being-i-would-trust-him-with-my-life-31325580.html

Pass the bucket.

I'm worried that if I click on this link, Google will keep showing me ads of "beautiful" Russian women who want husbands

syklops

Menas wrote: »

Ms Andreenkova was on the radio last night. She says that he is innocent and a "Very, very kind human being. He has lots of talents... he's very intelligent"

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/graham-dwyers-girlfriend-he-is-a-very-kind-human-being-i-would-trust-him-with-my-life-31325580.html

Pass the bucket.

Theres a lot of things that dont add up about that interview(just listened to it now). For starters, Boylan asked her how she met him and she couldn't say and when pushed, she said they met in "private". Then he asks her whether he believes she is innocent or not and she says she isnt an expert and so can't say, and then later says she believes he is innocent.

Menas

syklops wrote: »

Theres a lot of things that dont add up about that interview(just listened to it now). For starters, Boylan asked her how she met him and she couldn't say and when pushed, she said they met in "private". Then he asks her whether he believes she is innocent or not and she says she isnt an expert and so can't say, and then later says she believes he is innocent.

She is a very odd woman. Troubled in my opinion. I dont know why the media are giving her a platform to broadcast from. She is clearly an attention seeker too.

gigglemuch82

At the end of the interview with Adrian Kennedy on 98 FM, she burst out crying saying that she is sad because her mom died of stomach cancer in 2007 - which was completely out of context of the whole convo. What a bizarre person altogether!

take everything

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

he's trying to overturn the ban on his russian woman from visiting, said she's his new missus!

I can only imagine what his poor wife must be thinking of it all.
I'm still baffled how his wife stayed with for so long.