Aaron Brady Guilty as charged

tjhook

cameramonkey wrote: »

So only those with an in-depth knowledge should question the verdict or else you think they have questionable motives?

Pretty much. We could lower the bar from "in-depth" (that's not the phrase I used), but if somebody shows a very limited knowledge of what went on in the court room, I'd be cynical of their attempts to cast doubt on 6 months of effort by a jury of their peers.

As I said, the burden is on them to show why the trial was flawed - and it would need to be a stronger demonstration than a rehash of a couple of points made by defense counsel during the trial.

Gregor Samsa

mr_fegelien wrote: »

Is it possible that Aaron Brady was paid off to take blame for the killing while the real killer made off?

First up, he didn’t take the blame for the killing. He denied flat out he was there.

Second, is it possible - in the sense that “anything is possible”? Sure, why not. Let your imagination soar free and anything could be true.

But is it reasonable to think that it occurred? No.

gailforecast

cameramonkey wrote: »

Has his father been convicted of smuggling ?

Nope, smugglers are rarely caught. Like I said previously, northern smugglers generally inherit the family “business”. The majority of the provo scumbags are smuggling either fuel or un-stamped cigarettes.

BeerWolf

I don't get it -- 40 years, meanwhile other murderers get 8-12 years with frequent suspended sentencings...

Why the difference in magnitude? All murderers should get such sentencings if you ask me.

JP Liz V1

mynamejeff wrote: »

its a shame capital murder doesn't carry a capital sentence,

dirty rodents head on the bastard

Is 40 years the max he can get?

Edgware

cameramonkey wrote: »

So only those with an in-depth knowledge should question the verdict or else you think they have questionable motives?


A man who is 5cfoot 7 is convicted of a murder when the main witness a Garda and other witnesses describe the shooter as 6 foot tall. The main evidence against him seems to be statements he allegedly made incrimination himself to a man. This man may or may not have made a deal to stay in the US on the back of his statements. You don't have to be an expert to see that the evidence in this case is wafer thin.

You really havent a clue of what went on throughout this trial. Will you be put down for a thousand to get the defence fund going?

White lighting

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Is 40 years the max he can get?

That's the minimum he can get.

Ash.J.Williams

cameramonkey wrote: »

According to one witness who had not even heard of the shooting despite being interested in dissident republican politics. A guy who was picked up by homeland security and despite overstaying his visa by years is released soon afterwards, according to a immigration lawyer that is unprecedented.

It was proven he was there and he said he wasn’t that meant he’s a liar , he should have focused on not being the shooter but he was too busy lying about diesel

xvril

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

It was proven he was there and he said he wasn’t that meant he’s a liar , he should have focused on not being the shooter but he was too busy lying about diesel

What was the proof he was there? I haven't heard it

Jinglejangle69

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Special criminal court puts another scumbag away.

Thank god its not been abolished like a certain party is calling for.

How has this absolute lie received nine 'thanks'?

No doubt the same brigade lament the reliability of RTE, BBC, etc.

xvril

I thought the special criminal court didn't have juries?

Gregor Samsa

BeerWolf wrote: »

I don't get it -- 40 years, meanwhile other murderers get 8-12 years with frequent suspended sentencings...

Why the difference in magnitude? All murderers should get such sentencings if you ask me.

All murderers automatically get a life sentence. What happens then is that after 7 years, they’re eligible for parole. But no murder convict has ever been given parole the first time they apply. They have to wait 2 years to apply again, so the first half chance they have to be released (on parole) is after 9 years. However, the reality is that they always get refused again then too (there may have been exceptions in the past). The current average time spend in prison for murder in Ireland is 17 years, and rising. The granting of parole is at the sole discretion of the Minister for Justice.

Anyone you’re thinking of that only spent 8-12 years in prison for killing someone was convicted of manslaughter, not murder. There’s a big difference. It’s impossible to get a suspended sentence for murder, again you must be confusing it with another crime.

Legally, after you’re released from prison, you’re still serving the sentence - but on parole - for the rest of your life. This is different to a finite sentence which ends after it has been served.

On the matter of the minimum 40 years for Capital Murder, that was specifically written into the Criminal Justice Act 1990. Before that, it was legal custom for the President to commute the death sentence given (that was never going to be carried out) to 40 years. Here’s an explanation of why the legislation included it:

(Then minister) Ray Burke said that civilians may become a victim of murder for a myriad of reprehensible motives including passion, revenge and avarice.

He said the risk of this happening was relatively remote and a matter of fate.

The Justice Minister said, however, that gardaí and prison officers are brought into frequent contact with violent people through their duty to protect the public and as a result cannot simply choose to avoid danger.

Mr Burke said this group deserve “the utmost protection we can give them” and that we must rely “heavily on deterrence to protect them”.

Source: https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/explainer-what-is-capital-murder-and-why-is-there-a-special-category-for-the-murder-of-gardai-and-prison-officers-39425848.html

bmc58

Gammyeye wrote: »

Absolute scumbag. May he rot in prison.

40 years to go.Deserves every day of it.

cameramonkey

xvril wrote: »

What was the proof he was there? I haven't heard it

There is none except what he is alleged to have said in the states.

Ash.J.Williams

xvril wrote: »

I thought the special criminal court didn't have juries?

This was the ccc

Ash.J.Williams

cameramonkey wrote: »

There is none except what he is alleged to have said in the states.

And the phone evidence and circumstantial evidence about location and sightings and lying about his whereabouts and providing false alibis

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How has this absolute lie received nine 'thanks'?

No doubt the same brigade lament the reliability of RTE, BBC, etc.

You seem more worried about a post on boards.ie that got the court wrong rather than the absolute ****b-g gang who executed a guard and then had their ****b-g family and ****b-g friends threaten and intimidate witnesses at the trial.

All part of the same brigade - the sh-tbag brigade.

Spanish Eyes

I'd say 99.9% of the population are happy and relieved with the verdict. I am one of them.

So .1% of the population at a guess, is posting on Boards criticising the verdict straight out of the traps. Typical.

Few agree with such posters. They don't (like in the Covid restrictions thread) represent Ireland at all. Just bored keyboard warriors waiting for their Leaving Cert results or bots or whatever. They don't speak for me.

Let him appeal, it won't succeed. See, I can be certain of things too.

Great that the man was convicted, and I'd say most people agree.

mikemac2

xvril wrote: »

I thought the special criminal court didn't have juries?

I don't claim to read every post in every thread but this has been addressed a few times

He was convicted by a jury in the Central Criminal Court

roast222

roast222 wrote: »

https://www.dundalkdemocrat.ie/news/home/565864/the-most-outrageous-contempt-of-court-witness-intimidation-and-interference-in-the-trial-of-aaron-brady.html

Only 2 witnesses were willing to testify one of whose evidence was discarded due to video interference. Others were intimidated into not testifying and the jurors would have not have been aware of the other 5 testimonies who either failed to show up in court or who retracted their statements.

Crazy article, hopefully the Gardaí will go after the people intimidating the witnesses now. Democracy can't function when witness intimidation becomes a norm.

Gregor Samsa

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are yous not the least bit concerned,with the lack of physical evidence or that he deosnt fit the eye withness description of the shooter??

The evidence presented, discussed and challenged over 122 days convinced 11 members of the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the killer.

Until the time a compelling legal argument can sway a court of appeal, that’s 100% good enough for me.

Spanish Eyes

Deleted User wrote: »

Are yous not the least bit concerned,with the lack of physical evidence or that he deosnt fit the eye withness description of the shooter??

Nope, I trust the legal system, the courts, the judge's direction, the jury, the evidence etc. It took people like you a couple of hours to try and get people to think about the verdict, but the trial lasted over 100 days. And there was witness intimidation too. Typical for associates up that neck of the woods.

Why are you so concerned? Do you challenge every murder verdict because of what you perceive is lack of evidence?

There might be an agenda going on here for the Crossmaglen One and his as yet free cronies.

Edgware

Deleted User wrote: »

Are yous not the least bit concerned,with the lack of physical evidence or that he deosnt fit the eye withness description of the shooter??

Not a bit. Read the case. There's plenty of evidence on which the jury was satisfied. Only problem is that he has already fathered a child. Hope fully the child won't grow up a dirtbird like Daddy.

Gregor Samsa

I think after the jurors read about the scandalous amount witness intimidation that was revealed today, they’ll be even more convinced that they came to the right conclusion. It beggars belief.

It says something for the impartiality of the justice system that this information was kept from them so as not to sway their decision, and the case was tried solely on the totality of the large amount of evidence regarding the events that occurred.

cameramonkey

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Nope, I trust the legal system, the courts, the judge's direction, the jury, the evidence etc. It took people like you a couple of hours to try and get people to think about the verdict, but the trial lasted over 100 days. And there was witness intimidation too. Typical for associates up that neck of the woods.

Why are you so concerned? Do you challenge every murder verdict because of what you perceive is lack of evidence?

There might be an agenda going on here for the Crossmaglen One and his as yet free cronies.

What do you think the agenda here is? I think you are being a touch conspiratorial.

Beechwoodspark

Work colleague based up that way and who would be on the grape vine up there told me this evening that Aaron Bradys whole family all have a very bad name which is saying something for “bandit country”

Irishman80

Irishman80 wrote: »

You seem more worried about a post on boards.ie that got the court wrong rather than the absolute ****b-g gang who executed a guard and then had their ****b-g family and ****b-g friends threaten and intimidate witnesses at the trial.

All part of the same brigade - the sh-tbag brigade.

No, I care about somebody that routinely enters discussions and disseminates false information.

Boards.ie is a very large website in Ireland and demonstrable lies must be called out immediately.

Gregor Samsa

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes i do challenge murder convictions,where there is no evidence


There is simply no physical evidence,he shot that gaurd (and eyewitness testimony to suggest he didnt).....quite why someone pointing this out equates to having an agenda is beyond me

The lack of physical evidence is inconsequential. It may have made the investigation easier and the trial shorter, but to a conviction is not unsound simply because of the lack of it.

And to say that there was no evidence is, yet again, to irrationally dismiss the plain fact that a large amount of evidence was submitted to and argued about during the trial. And that this evidence was regarded by the jury - who actually were present for it all, unlike any of us - to be of sufficient quality and volume to cause them to believe, beyond even a reasonable doubt, that he did it.

JingleJangle69 entered into this discussion with his well known agenda. He tried to carry on his usual shtick and ridicule Sinn Féin but anyone following the case, even at a distance, knew that the case was being heard in the Central Criminal Court.

That is a demonstrable lie. There is no mistaking it.

When you come across such a lie, it must be addressed.

xvril

I am not saying he is innocent but in my eyes there is reasonable doubt. He sounds like hes missing a brain cell or two.

Like how could you mistake someone of 5 ft 7 for being at least 6 foot.

tayto lover

cameramonkey wrote: »

So only those with an in-depth knowledge should question the verdict or else you think they have questionable motives?


A man who is 5cfoot 7 is convicted of a murder when the main witness a Garda and other witnesses describe the shooter as 6 foot tall. The main evidence against him seems to be statements he allegedly made incrimination himself to a man. This man may or may not have made a deal to stay in the US on the back of his statements. You don't have to be an expert to see that the evidence in this case is wafer thin.

You’re too late.
The trial is over.
That was all put forward by Brady’s defence already.
It was a very dark stormy night and the Garda who said that was having a gun pointed at his head. Easy to be mistaken in those circumstances.

They got the right man and everyone around this area of N. Louth and S. Armagh knows it. Not many tears being shed for Brady, believe me. Tramp of the highest order. Now convicted cold blooded murderer.

Conall Cernach

xvril wrote: »

I am not saying he is innocent but in my eyes there is reasonable doubt. He sounds like hes missing a brain cell or two.

Like how could you mistake someone of 5 ft 7 for being at least 6 foot.

A shotgun might make an attacker appear larger in the mind of the person it is being pointed at. Some psychological thing, maybe.


In other words, I dunno.

JP Liz V1

White lighting wrote: »

That's the minimum he can get.

What's the max?

Ash.J.Williams

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes i do challenge murder convictions,where there is no evidence


There is simply no physical evidence,he shot that gaurd (and eyewitness testimony to suggest he didnt).....quite why someone pointing this out equates to having an agenda is beyond me



Your only responsible for your own actions in life,to my view he is not the shooter (or severe doubts lie over it) and thus not responsible for this murder....may be a complete scumbag/lier,but a poor character,deosnt equuate to being a murderer

At least wait for prime time on rte

mr_fegelien

How did Brady think going to America would place him outside the arm of reach from Irish law enforcement. Did he not know about a little thing called extradition treaties?

He should have gone to Russia.

Gregor Samsa

xvril wrote: »

I am not saying he is innocent but in my eyes there is reasonable doubt. He sounds like hes missing a brain cell or two.

Like how could you mistake someone of 5 ft 7 for being at least 6 foot.

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. People see things very differently when they’re in stressful situations, such as having a gun pointed at them after seeing someone else else fatally shot right in front of them.

Concentrating on this one point as read in a newspaper article may convince you that the conviction is unsound. But again, as I keep repeating, you have not had the benefit of hearing the totality of evidence and all the arguments that the jury did.

White lighting

mr_fegelien wrote: »

How did Brady think going to America would place him outside the arm of reach from Irish law enforcement. Did he not know about a little thing called extradition treaties?

He should have gone to Russia.

He would have been safe enough in America if he could keep his mouth shut.

xvril

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. People see things very differently when they’re in stressful situations, such as having a gun pointed at them after seeing someone else else fatally shot right in front of them.

Concentrating on this one point as read in a newspaper article may convince you that the conviction is unsound. But again, as I keep repeating, you have not had the benefit of hearing the totality of evidence and all the arguments that the jury did.

That is true, maybe I am missing some key detail.

Mr Cahill's testimony is super sketchy as well. It would make me think he has something to hide.

timthumbni

Wonder will there be a push for a kiddies play park to be named in honour of the convicted “man” in his home turf?

His alibi that he was diesel smuggling/ washing/ sludge dumping at the time just about sums up the area tbh.

He sounds a lovely character indeed judging by the reports. A great loss to society.

tayto lover

xvril wrote: »

That is true, maybe I am missing some key detail.

Mr Cahill's testimony is super sketchy as well. It would make me think he has something to hide.

CT Forum ————————->

walshb

Delighted with this result...

Now, keep going. This was a team effort. Go get the others and put them down!!!

xvril

tayto lover wrote: »

CT Forum ————————->

Supporting dissident republicans and being pictured with a murderer are not too traits I would find good in a witness. And his strange situation in the US.

The thing about telling Garda in New York must have been a lie as well.

Ash.J.Williams

tayto lover wrote: »

CT Forum ————————->

There is odd goings on with Cahill and immigration

Ash.J.Williams

Can’t wait til suspect B is reeled in

Truthvader

Interestingly there is a lot of hints here that he is connected to the Sinn Fein /IRA good republican / very nice man club but not a single shred of anything concrete. Even the Independent aren't running with it. Strangely all the Sinn Fein posters have come steaming in here to question the verdict. Wonder why. Is it just the usual anti Garda Sinn Fein impulse or is there some other reason why they want to support him. Anyone actually know what is going on and why?

Millionaire only not

timthumbni wrote: »

Wonder will there be a push for a kiddies play park to be named in honour of the convicted “man” in his home turf?

His alibi that he was diesel smuggling/ washing/ sludge dumping at the time just about sums up the area tbh.

He sounds a lovely character indeed judging by the reports. A great loss to society.

Wash him in diesel we know the rest after that , scum bag hope he feels every day in prison is eternity.

xvril

Truthvader wrote: »

Interestingly there is a lot of hints here that he is connected to the Sinn Fein /IRA good republican / very nice man club but not a single shred of anything concrete. Even the Independent aren't running with it. Strangely all the Sinn Fein posters have come steaming in here to question the verdict. Wonder why. Is it just the usual anti Garda Sinn Fein impulse or is there some other reason why they want to support him. Anyone actually know what is going on and why?

Or maybe some of the details are a bit strange

Millionaire only not

mr_fegelien wrote: »

An honest question for people here,

if you were one of the suspects yet to be brought to trial and were facing 40+ years, would you off yourself? I think I'd buy potassium cyanide or methanol/ethylene glycol and just kill myself.

I've never gotten how criminals are given bail and don't take the opportunity to end their life when they know they're facing a potentially long time.

Then again, many of these crooks aren't the brightest tools in the toolshed.

Because there big men with there guns but haven’t the balls to use them on there self to save us and the state minding them for rest of there useless lives .

Colonel Claptrap

xvril wrote: »

Like how could you mistake someone of 5 ft 7 for being at least 6 foot.

"We will f***ing kill you, don't move, I will shoot you".

Imagine somebody screamed this at you, moments after shooting your colleague in the face with a shotgun.

Reckon you could recall his height?

I'm just back from a restaurant. Haven't a clue how tall the waiter was.

Ten of Swords

mr_fegelien drop the repeated suicide insinuations right now if you want to keep posting in this thread