John Joe Malone found guilty of murder of Ann "Nancy" Smyth

Nokia6230i

Having heard Frank Greaney of Newstalks updates phoned into KCLR & read the evidence as reported by Kilkenny People Mr. Malone was finally found guilty 30 years on from Ms. Smyths murder.

Had he been found guilty back then or anytime in the following 2-3, maybe 4 years he'd've likely been well out by now (given life sentences, which average 22 years currently and are only increasing but which back then were, at a guess, more likely to be 10-15).

Am I only one to be a little stunned by verdict based on amt. of hearsay evidence?

From 05 & then from 2012 so many people seemed to come forward; why after so many years?

Their excuses hold no water; a miscarriage of justice may have occurred here; I'd be appealing the conviction & no doubts about it.

Too much hearsay in this for me to be wholly comfortable with a conviction that'll mean someone may end up dying in prison given his age.

I'm not saying he's necessarily innocent; I'm arguing the evidence used to convict him was shockingly poor & repeated witnesses who belatedly came forward saw to that....

Collie D

I've literally just read this story without any background knowledge and was thinking of opening a thread.

Is this the first conviction since the Serious Crimes Review Team was set up?

Not sure what the standard of evidence is but I do believe that in certain unsolved crimes there are people who know who the guilty party is.

Pat Mustard

Links:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/criminal-court/john-malone-sentenced-to-life-after-cold-case-murder-trial-1.3047525

http://www.thejournal.ie/john-joseph-malone-murder-case-3340240-Apr2017/

lollsangel

A lot of the evidence seems very hearsay....on saying that maybe if we knew of the background that they had we might understand better.
How (if at all) did they know each other?
What would have been his motive?

Ralf and Florian

lollsangel wrote: »

A lot of the evidence seems very hearsay....on saying that maybe if we knew of the background that they had we might understand better.
How (if at all) did they know each other?
What would have been his motive?

Do you mean him and the victim? Remember this was Kilkenny 30 years ago, lot of people in the town probably knew each other at least to see. As for motive there was a suggestion that she accused his brother of robbing her and he was angry about her saying this.

lollsangel

Ralf and Florian wrote: »

Do you mean him and the victim? Remember this was Kilkenny 30 years ago, lot of people in the town probably knew each other at least to see. As for motive there was a suggestion that she accused his brother of robbing her and he was angry about her saying this.

I was wondering was she more of an acquaintance to him it just seemed strange for someone to attack someone for no reason

darkdubh

Collie D wrote: »

I've literally just read this story without any background knowledge and was thinking of opening a thread.

Is this the first conviction since the Serious Crimes Review Team was set up?

Not sure what the standard of evidence is but I do believe that in certain unsolved crimes there are people who know who the guilty party is.

There's been about four or five cases that have resulted in convictions since the SCR were set up.

Nokia6230i

darkdubh wrote: »

There's been about four or five cases that have resulted in convictions since the SCR were set up.

Did the John Crerar one come under that? He was convicted in 2002 of the Phyllis Murphy murder in late 1979/early 1980.

Another one who, had he been convicted in the early 80s, 80 or 81 would probably be out by now. Instead, he's looking at at least another 5-7 or maybe more and that's obviously only a possibility.

He's pushing 70 currently; as our prison populations age we're facing another challenge but that's for another day.

dastardly00

Without going into any detail, basically everybody knew from day one, including the Gardaí, that Malone was the murderer.

darkdubh

Nokia6230i wrote: »

Did the John Crerar one come under that? He was convicted in 2002 of the Phyllis Murphy murder in late 1979/early 1980.

Another one who, had he been convicted in the early 80s, 80 or 81 would probably be out by now. Instead, he's looking at at least another 5-7 or maybe more and that's obviously only a possibility.

He's pushing 70 currently; as our prison populations age we're facing another challenge but that's for another day.

As far as I'm aware that was the first successful cold case murder investigation in the state, it led to the foundation of the SCR.

Regarding Crerar he's also regarded as a suspect in the murder of another woman in The Curragh in the early 70's, in that case there's no surviving evidence that could have resulted in a DNA sample. TBH I can't see him being released anytime soon, he falls under a certain category of sex killer who would be very likely to do it again. Look at Shaw and Evans, the guys who murdered two women in 1976. One of them died recently in prison and the other is still inside.

infogiver

dastardly00 wrote: »

Without going into any detail, basically everybody knew from day one, including the Gardaí, that Malone was the murderer.

A dangerous man walking around aided and abetted, apparently, by his doting family.

fg1406

my husband is from the area and the world and his mother knew who killed Nancy Smyth. The plaintiff had an alibi for the night and when that person died the SCR team went about appealing for people to no longer be afraid and come forward. Bear in mind a threat was made just last week to an 80 year old woman who was due to give evidence. I wasn't convinced a few weeks ago of a conviction based entirely on circumstancial evidence, with witness reports being from over 30 years ago but obviously the DPP felt confident enough to bring a case and the jury felt the evidence stacked up enough to convict. I am curious as to whether he will lodge an appeal.

dastardly00

You have to say well done to the DPP for winning the case. Justice has (finally) been served.

darkdubh

fg1406 wrote: »

my husband is from the area and the world and his mother knew who killed Nancy Smyth. The plaintiff had an alibi for the night and when that person died the SCR team went about appealing for people to no longer be afraid and come forward. Bear in mind a threat was made just last week to an 80 year old woman who was due to give evidence. I wasn't convinced a few weeks ago of a conviction based entirely on circumstancial evidence, with witness reports being from over 30 years ago but obviously the DPP felt confident enough to bring a case and the jury felt the evidence stacked up enough to convict. I am curious as to whether he will lodge an appeal.

Does this guy have much previous? He looks like he's no stranger to a prison cell.

fg1406

darkdubh wrote: »

Does this guy have much previous? He looks like he's no stranger to a prison cell.

He was in the uk for years after the murder and only returned to the locality in recent times so to be honest I don't know. I'll ask the in laws next time I see them.

Nokia6230i

infogiver wrote: »

A dangerous man walking around aided and abetted, apparently, by his doting family.

So it appears incl. a sister in law (anyone got a link to the case of his brother/her husband who appears to have done time for a sexual misdemeanor involving a minor/minors which was briefly alluded to during the trial) who he confessed to.

However we go back to the point that, from my reading of reports in the Kilkenny People, Frank Greaneys calls into KCLR daily etc. it was a lot of he confessed to X, Y & Z.

Very circumstantial, a lot of hearsay.

I'd be lodging an appeal against conviction being honest; indeed I had thought jury might be instructed to consider manslaughter or even acquittal.

Wonder did his brief suggest a plea of manslaughter from the outset instead of proceeding on a not guilty plea to murder?

Beanybabog

Why did it take so long to come to trial- did people not come forward? Was there new evidence? Were the witnesses afraid? It seems odd to get a conviction for murder based on the testimony of a number of people- if that is enough to convict him surely it was enough 20 years when it happen d?