Graham Dwyer court case *READ FIRST POST BEFORE POSTING*

Heisenberg1

El Weirdo wrote: »

This is just nonsense.

Good argument. Are you saying that he won't be up for review after 7 years ?

Jimminy Mc Fukhead

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So because he is older he is less of a threat? I'm sorry but that is utter nonsense.

While you were asleep we were discussing the length of a 'life' sentence in ireland. I pointed out macarthur as an example of a long life sentence. he was left in until he was old. on the scale of our life sentences that is long.

as to what level of threat he is? how would i know. never met the man and im not a mind reader.

learn to read before you try to progress to being a smartarse

ohnonotgmail

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

His case will be reviewed in 7years but knowing our wonderful justice system he could be out before this. I don't see why the judge could not set a minimum sentence as in 50 years before being considered for parole.

he will not be out before this. His first review will be at 7 years. he is VERY unlikely to be released at this point. His release is at the discretion of the minister for justice. The judge can set a minimum term of 30 years or the remainder of their life. I havent seen the actual sentence handed down in this case so cant comment further on whether this happened.

realdanbreen

suicide_circus wrote: »

I wonder what he will appeal on...

No cause of death was ever established so if I was him I would start there.

El Weirdo

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

Good argument. Are you saying that he won't be up for review after 7 years ?

No, the other part of what I quoted was nonsense.

topper75

Serious heroics performed by cops.

We all have our whinges about them now and then, but by God they pulled out all the stops to send that psycho down. If they failed, I strongly believe that there would have been other victims in time to come.

The technical stuff was better than any CSI episode. Kudos.

Frigga_92

Happy to see him get life but what is life in Ireland really.

While all my sympathy is with Elaine O'Hara's family and everything they've gone through with regard to the murder itself and all the horrible media coverage they've had to endure, I can't help but think of Graham Dwyer's wife and his 2 children, what kind of a life will they have now? That horrible man has ruined so many lives.

The Moldy Gowl

Can someone give us lazy people a Tl:dr of all this?

Is he someone famous who killed someone? What's different about this murder
God I feel so out of the loop.

Laois_Man

Neyite wrote: »

He was in the audience shortly before Elaine's body was recovered. It was on the primetime special.

A picture of O'Dwyer taken in at The Late Late Show after he had murdered Elaine O'Hara and before her body was found

ColeTrain

Laois_Man wrote: »

A picture of O'Dwyer taken in at The Late Late Show after he had murdered Elaine O'Hara and before her body was found

Here's Johnny...

Vojera

I didn't like the way it was covered in much of the media. Today FM is what I would normally listen to during the day while I'm at work and they kept repeating the phrase that he was "charged with murdering Elaine O'Hara for his own sexual gratification" when that is plainly not the case. He was charged with murder, the motivation is not relevant to the charge. I know it seems pedantic, but I really felt like they were pushing the sexual aspect in order to "tabloid-it-up" and make it more sensational.

SEPT 23 1989

the coverage of this was completely OTT

you should not have to turn the radio off at 3 in the afternoon because you have a child in earshot

suicide_circus

The media love any bit of salacious smut they can drag up. Sex sells. Always has. Adding insult to injury to the families involved obviously.

nullzero

He should and most likely will spend his remaining years behind bars. The likelihood of him being released at any point is very slim considering his apparent psychological make up being that of a psychopath, which means rehabilitation to reintegrate into society is not something that can be realistically believed to be possible. I'm sure he will continuously profess his innocence due to his being a narcissistic psychopath but it would be unconscionable for anyone to make a decision to release such an individual back into society.

spockety

Vojera wrote: »

I didn't like the way it was covered in much of the media. Today FM is what I would normally listen to during the day while I'm at work and they kept repeating the phrase that he was "charged with murdering Elaine O'Hara for his own sexual gratification" when that is plainly not the case. He was charged with murder, the motivation is not relevant to the charge. I know it seems pedantic, but I really felt like they were pushing the sexual aspect in order to "tabloid-it-up" and make it more sensational.

Actually that is the case that the DPP pursued, and the jury were directed to only find Dwyer guilty if they were satisfied that the elements of the case that the DPP put forward were true beyond any reasonable doubt. i.e. that he had taken Elaine Dwyer to Kilakee Mountain with the express intention of stabbing her for sexual gratification.

If they had thought he strangled her, for example, he could have been found not guilty.

PressRun

What does life mean here? How many years are we talking? He seems like the perfect candidate for spending the rest of his life in prison tbh. He definitely seems like he would have been a reoffender. Once would never be enough for this guy.

ColeTrain

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

the coverage of this was completely OTT

you should not have to turn the radio off at 3 in the afternoon because you have a child in earshot

So there should be a watershed on the news?

ohnonotgmail

PressRun wrote: »

What does life mean here? How many years are we talking? He seems like the perfect candidate for spending the rest of his life in prison tbh. He definitely seems like he would have been a reoffender. Once would never be enough for this guy.

minimum of 7 years. After that it is at the discretion of the minister for justice

Vojera

spockety wrote: »

Actually that is the case that the DPP pursued, and the jury were directed to only find Dwyer guilty if they were satisfied that the elements of the case that the DPP put forward were true beyond any reasonable doubt. i.e. that he had taken Elaine Dwyer to Kilakee Mountain with the express intention of stabbing her for sexual gratification.

If they had thought he strangled her, for example, he could have been found not guilty.

Really? That seems unusual. For what reason did they look at it that way? Was it the lack of a definite cause of death?

Omackeral

Just listening to the radio there and they were speaking about the case of Mark Nash. Here's a guy who was sentenced today for a double murder... As well as already having carried out another double murder previously. He's killed 4 people. In any other time, this would dominate the media. The sexual nature of the Dwyer case has somewhat put it in the shadows. Don't know if that's good or bad for family members of the deceased.

nelly17

Cant help but wonder what else he's been up to

ohnonotgmail

Vojera wrote: »

Really? That seems unusual. For what reason did they look at it that way? Was it the lack of a definite cause of death?

the state pathologist couldnt determine cause of death.

RGDATA!

suicide_circus wrote: »

Not a great comparison but Eamonn Lillis killed his wife stone dead, tried to frame another man and was out in 5 years.

he wasn't convicted of murder and didn't get a life sentence, so not comparable really as you say.

The average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is 18 years. There's not much reason to believe that Dwyer will serve less time than average for this kind of sentence - on the contrary.

correction: average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is actually 20 years now.

Neyite

ColeTrain wrote: »

So there should be a watershed on the news?

No, but if a bulletin contains graphic details, might be no harm to mention it beforehand so people have the option of turning it off or lowering the volume if kids are around, especially considering the content of some of the texts that were quoted.

spockety

Vojera wrote: »

Really? That seems unusual. For what reason did they look at it that way? Was it the lack of a definite cause of death?

I'm not sure. Perhaps there is a higher burden in cases which rely on circumstancial evidence, or where there is no cause of death etc.?

Banjo String

Followed this case closely, I read some sad stuff about it, but the one thing that hit me hardest was the judge describing Elaines crys as 'animal like' as Dwyer stabbed her as he was having sex with her, and later him trying to soothe her by telling her "ssssh, it's not that bad"


That poor poor woman, may she hopefully now find some peace.

As for Dwyer, what a sick and twisted individual. I hope his time passes as slowly and as unpleasantly as is possible for him.

Utter, utter disgusting animal.

Full Marx

Still think he will get the conviction overturned on appeal, the judge didn't hide his bias that well, will be just one plank of his case against his conviction.

I don't think there was enough evidence to convict him of murder.

take everything

spockety wrote: »

Actually that is the case that the DPP pursued, and the jury were directed to only find Dwyer guilty if they were satisfied that the elements of the case that the DPP put forward were true beyond any reasonable doubt. i.e. that he had taken Elaine Dwyer to Kilakee Mountain with the express intention of stabbing her for sexual gratification.

If they had thought he strangled her, for example, he could have been found not guilty.

I agree.
I'm a bit puzzled by people describing the coverage as too much tbh.
Some of it was unnecessary but i thought it was a good eye opener that guys like this piece of **** exist and how they prey on vulnerable people.

And to understand the case, a lot of the detail was necessary.
Are people saying it was too much because it was titillating.
You'd have to be fairly weird to find it titillating tbh.
Psychologically interesting and informative, but titillating?

Heisenberg1

El Weirdo wrote: »

No, the other part of what I quoted was nonsense.

Ok I know he won't be out before 7 years butitI would make you laugh that a person that was convicted of such a heinous crime can even be reviewed after only 7 years.

eigrod

take everything wrote: »

I agree.
I'm a bit puzzled by people describing the coverage as too much tbh.
Some of it was unnecessary but i thought it was a good eye opener that guys like this piece of **** exist and how they prey on vulnerable people.

And to understand the case, a lot of the detail was necessary.
Are people saying it was too much because it was titillating.
You'd have to be fairly weird to find it titillating tbh.
Psychologically interesting and informative, but titillating?

I agree with that. Plus the whole technology element to it, I found fascinating. The lengths the Gardai IT experts went to trace the various phones etc.

And of course the pure good fortune and good Garda work of the way the items were found in Roundwood.

ohnonotgmail

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

Ok I know he won't be out before 7 years butitI would make you laugh that a person that was convicted of such a heinous crime can even be reviewed after only 7 years.

reviewed? yes. released? no.

Heisenberg1

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

reviewed? yes. released? no.

You don't know if he will be released or not.

ohnonotgmail

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

You don't know if he will be released or not.

i would be happy to bet you a large sum of money that he wont.

Laois_Man

Banjo String wrote: »

Followed this case closely, I read some sad stuff about it, but the one thing that hit me hardest was the judge describing Elaines crys as 'animal like' as Dwyer stabbed her as he was having sex with her, and later him trying to soothe her by telling her "ssssh, it's not that bad"

There is absolutely no way that anybody (other than O'Dwyer) knows, whether they are a judge or not, what Elaine's cries were like, or even if there were any, or what she or he was doing when she was stabbed, or what he said to her, or for that matter, even that she was stabbed at all!

Laois_Man

Laois_Man wrote: »

There is absolutely no way that anybody (other than O'Dwyer) knows, whether they are a judge or not, what Elaine's cries were like, or even if there were any, or what she or he was doing when she was stabbed, or what he said to her, or for that matter, even that she was stabbed at all!

They found and showed the jury videos of him stabbing her.

Nodin

RGDATA! wrote: »

he wasn't convicted of murder and didn't get a life sentence, so not comparable really as you say.

The average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is 18 years. There's not much reason to believe that Dwyer will serve less time than average for this kind of sentence - on the contrary.

correction: average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is actually 20 years now.

True, but in exceptional cases its extended at the discretion of the Minister for Justice.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/serial-killer-who-pledged-to-rape-and-murder-one-woman-a-week-dies-at-69-26856022.html

ThisRegard

Neyite wrote: »

No, but if a bulletin contains graphic details, might be no harm to mention it beforehand so people have the option of turning it off or lowering the volume if kids are around, especially considering the content of some of the texts that were quoted.

All stations I listened to did this.

Nodin

Laois_Man wrote: »

There is absolutely no way that anybody (other than O'Dwyer) knows, whether they are a judge or not, what Elaine's cries were like, or even if there were any, or what she or he was doing when she was stabbed, or what he said to her, or for that matter, even that she was stabbed at all!

Video evidence was used during the trial that showed this, and the use of a knife on other women. The same evidence was used during the case to deny him bail for the entire period pending trial (held in camera in the high court, I think).

Laois_Man

Deleted User wrote: »

They found and showed the jury videos of him stabbing her.

Apologies, I thought the poster was talking about the way Elaine actually died.

ThisRegard

Laois_Man wrote: »

There is absolutely no way that anybody (other than O'Dwyer) knows, whether they are a judge or not, what Elaine's cries were like, or even if there were any, or what she or he was doing when she was stabbed, or what he said to her, or for that matter, even that she was stabbed at all!

It was in reference to a video of where he stabbed her, not the actual murder.

yourdeadwright

ud be wrong there , the judge was talking about the video of him stabbing her while there in bed together not of the actually murder,

IITYWYBMAD

RGDATA! wrote: »

he wasn't convicted of murder and didn't get a life sentence, so not comparable really as you say.

The average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is 18 years. There's not much reason to believe that Dwyer will serve less time than average for this kind of sentence - on the contrary.

correction: average time served on a life sentence in Ireland is actually 20 years now.

What are you basing this on? Life terms handed down, and including the amount of time served by the likes of McArthur? We can all google ya'know?

His sentence will be reviewed in 8 years time, that's a fact, he could be released at that stage.

Assuming that he is not deemed suitable for release, he'll get a review every 3 years, that's also a fact.

The average time (of late) has been skewed by those serving inordinately long life terms.

Omackeral

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i would be happy to bet you a large sum of money that he wont.

I'll take some of that bet. There's people locked up for over 20 years at present for more 'normal' murders ie they didn't attract half as much attention or were as sordid. I'd imagine it's Arbour Hill for Mr Dwyer as there was an overt sexual element to his crime. Anywhere else and he'd be destroyed in general population is imagine.

Neyite

take everything wrote: »

I agree.
I'm a bit puzzled by people describing the coverage as too much tbh.
Some of it was unnecessary but i thought it was a good eye opener that guys like this piece of **** exist and how they prey on vulnerable people.

And to understand the case, a lot of the detail was necessary.
Are people saying it was too much because it was titillating.
You'd have to be fairly weird to find it titillating tbh.
Psychologically interesting and informative, but titillating?

I love a good murder mystery novel. I also love the likes of Criminal Minds, Bones and SVU type whodunnits. Never find them titillating - and if I did I'd be very worried indeed, but the forensics and investigation process interests me. This case relied heavily on those as there was no established cause of death, no confession, no witnesses to the crime.

I'm not saying that the coverage was too much - though some rags did go a bit far at times - just that it presents very awkward questions if you have a kid of an age where they understand the mechanics of sex but will ask you about the extreme forms of fetishes and the like that were described in the bulletins. I'd dread trying to explain in an age appropriate manner what bondage, bdsm, and bloodletting fetishes were to a kid that age. A simple "the following report contains content of an adult nature" before reading the bulletin would suffice.

The Hill Billy

May Elaine O'Hara rest in peace now. I hope that her family & all of those affected by O'Dwyer's actions & the court case get some closure & peace also.

RGDATA!

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

What are you basing this on? Life terms handed down, and including the amount of time served by the likes of McArthur? We can all google ya'know?

His sentence will be reviewed in 8 years time, that's a fact, he could be released at that stage.

Assuming that he is not deemed suitable for release, he'll get a review every 3 years, that's also a fact.

The average time (of late) has been skewed by those serving inordinately long life terms.

Actually, you're right to point out that a few people serving long life terms are skewing those figures, so I stand corrected.
It seems the average length of a life sentences for those who have been released is more like the 12 years you said he'll probably do.
I still think there's every reason to expect he'll do longer than average given the notoriety of the case, lack of remorse etc.

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Omackeral wrote: »

I'll take some of that bet. There's people locked up for over 20 years at present for more 'normal' murders ie they didn't attract half as much attention or were as sordid. I'd imagine it's Arbour Hill for Mr Dwyer as there was an overt sexual element to his crime. Anywhere else and he'd be destroyed in general population is imagine.

you really think he will be allowed out at the first opportunity?

murpho999

Full Marx wrote: »

Still think he will get the conviction overturned on appeal, the judge didn't hide his bias that well, will be just one plank of his case against his conviction.

I don't think there was enough evidence to convict him of murder.

Don't agree that your perceived judge's bias is a factor for an appeal as he was convicted by a jury not the judge.
He can only appeal on limited grounds from what I have read and is unlikely to succeed.
Some people think that circumstantial evidence is weaker evidence than 'smoking gun' evidence but this is actually not the case.

Spanish Eyes

It appears that Dwyer will appeal pretty soon to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

This article in the Journal is very informative, and sets out the possible grounds for appeal, and what the Court of Appeal can decide.

http://www.thejournal.ie/graham-dwyer-appeal-2053910-Apr2015/