Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Kerry Babies Case

Options
1363739414261

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,074 ✭✭✭Deeec


    I don't believe she was as young as 11 either. I was just replying to someone who suggested it as a reason for silence.

    The woman is in her 50s and man is in his sixties. Supposing they are the parents it means the man was at least 21 in 1984. It's unlikely a 21 year old was with an 11 year old ( possible but unlikely) and allowed to continue with the relationship.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,265 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Mathematically she could have been as young as 11.

    Mathematically he could have been as old as 30.

    But there is nothing to suggest that the couple were together in 1984 either.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,074 ✭✭✭Deeec


    It has been reported that the couple arrested have been a couple since the early 80s.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,231 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    Crazy case, I was listening to Niall Boylan last night, I'd never heard of this before.


    So DNA has been taken, how long should it take for results to get back ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,265 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    It's been reported in the papers that the probable mum's father was a garda.

    I found one piece from the Sunday World with the headline of the woman being a daughter of a Garda, but then in the article refers to it as a familial link, which is a little bit more vague than a daughter.

    Either way I'll not believe anything until their identies are made official, if they ever are.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 38 siobhan2005


    Irish times have printed that woman was in her late 50s, which if she is 55yrs now, would make her at least 16yrs old at the time, probably older given they say late.


    "A lawyer for the pair – a man in his 60s and a woman in her late 50s – said they strongly deny killing the baby on April 9th, 1984."


    https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/2023/03/26/results-of-dna-tests-awaited-in-kerry-babies-case/



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,996 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Except the case is 39 years old and according to papers is in her 50's



  • Posts: 1,539 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    All I'm saying is I strongly doubt she was as young as 11 years old.

    Possible? Yes.

    Likely? No.

    For the reasons already given.



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,383 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    If she is 59, she is in her 50s, and would have been 20 years old, not 11. Given the time lime, she is more likely to be 59 than 50. This should not be as difficult as people are making it. Being mathmatically possible is not the same as being likely.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,996 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Ya true I was thinking she was early but see now she may be late



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,668 ✭✭✭ittakestwo


    We can take that at least one of the people arrested is the parent of Baby John. But maybe not two. The man arrested was kept in a day longer for questioning. The mother of baby John must have not shown that she was pregnant as family and neighbours would have questioned at the time where her baby went.


    There is some rare cases where women dont show they're pregnant and don't even know they're pregnant till they're literally giving birth. Perhaps this happened here. One day she was a teenager girl and next thing she is giving birth and is an unmarried mother in a rural area where it would be frowned upon in 84. The sudden shock then causing or somone in the family to crack.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,030 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    The man arrested was kept in a day longer for questioning.

    This was purely because he took more breaks during questioning than the woman so his detention was extended. It doesn't mean anything in relation to his possible level of involvement or guilt.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭walterking


    I dare you to call any woman aged 55 as being in her "late 50's". 😁

    Late 50's suggests 58/59



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    The Times article linked earlier said the DNA was from "a sibling of the deceased Baby John". If another man or woman was involved that DNA would be from a half sibling.(assuming the DNA was from a child of both people arrested).

    From the Times article;

    "DNA at the centre of the Kerry Baby case was voluntarily handed over by a person who gardai believe to be a sibling of the deceased Baby John. This then led gardai to focus on the couple, who have denied any role in the murder of the five-day-old infant. Gardai believe the couple are the biological parents of Baby John."

    The Gardaí believe both are Baby John's parents.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    This was in the news non stop for months. And then on and off for years. We even chatted about it in school all the time at the time.

    You could not avoid this. It was the biggest news ever in the country for so long.

    And if you were from Kerry, it was part of your daily life wondering what happened to that baby. It would have been like 9/11 is to new yorkers.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Given the age of this womans children i doubt very much she was 11 when baby john was born.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭chooseusername




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,139 ✭✭✭Hangdogroad


    I was ten at the time, it was a huge story and a long running one due to the tribunal. You couldn't not be aware of it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Sorry, getting threats of bans from mods here. Probably time to leave the thread.



  • Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Mo Ghile Mear


    Ok yes that’s true… a full sibling would imply both parents. I just wonder if the reporting is completely accurate. Half sibling or full sibling might not be differentiated at this early stage. I’m not sure if the papers have the full story and the official Garda reports seem to be very sparse.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,142 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Indeed- speculation and fitting square pegs into round holes is what has brought us to this situation- thankfully investigations and resultant decisions to prosecute these days are based on facts and evidence - hopefully we have a much improved Garda investigation team who are far removed from the keystone cops who previously investigated this tragic death.



  • Administrators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,947 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Neyite


    If you assume that she was somewhere in the middle of the age range- say mid teens, it's easy enough (or was back then) to take them out of school, no external authority checked attendance the way Tusla do now. In fact it was routine for schools to exclude expectant mothers back then. Everyone colluded, from the head to the local priest to the family to keep the secret. I did my LC in 92 and it was in 91 that the first pregnant pupil was encouraged to remain in school. But I had a cousin who was "off sick" for a term and did schoolwork at home. Her baby was adopted out. I know a couple (adults) who had many children of their own and their first secretly adopted baby found them again in her mid thirties. Adoptions were very secretive back then, often the children themselves never had any idea well into adulthood that they had been adopted and only found out due to a medical issue. .

    An April full-term baby like John was easy enough to conceal. Conception would have happened around August, but visible signs of pregnancy wouldn't be noticeable until possibly November. It's really only 4 or 5 months of hiding really. The school would then exclude her. After that the story could go around that "Mary" went to a mother and baby unit to help her Auntie Sally after her operation.

    In terms of concealment /murder, well, if you were told during your pregnancy that you baby was going to be adopted by your mother or father then after 5 days they take the baby to the adoptive parents, you'd believe them. And it's fairly easy to continue the lie onwards and insist that John is with his loving parents in Boston or Dublin, every time it's mentioned - if you were allowed ever mention it again. But also very easy to hand the mother a photo of a baby in 6 months or a year and say the adoptive parents sent it. They all look like bald spuds at that age. So if you as a teen have a picture of your baby, why would you think the one washed up on the beach had anything to do with yours? Most of us would think that our own parents would be incapable of murder - and especially such a brutal and callous one.

    It may very well be possible that the couple who were arrested fully believed that they had a son out there who would someday trace them and they could be reunited and that baby John's birth date was just a coincidence. And that the perpetrator is long dead and literally got away with murder all their life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭cute geoge


    I never heard such a load of horseshlt in all my life .



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,142 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    What puzzles me, is WHY the baby was killed- as you rightly point out, there was practically a hidden industry and support structure underwritten by the Catholic Church around giving babies up for adoption after so called “illegitimate births” - medical intervention would have been required at some point so doctors would have been involved somewhere along the line- informal “behind the scenes” arrangements to give up the baby after birth would have been readily available - I just don’t see why this baby suffered these injuries and his untimely death - I hope we can at the very least, learn something about our dark past as a society from this terrible tragedy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,758 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    I dunno, Neyite. Everything you say about concealing a pregnancy, believing your parents had arranged an adoption etc. and living in blissful ignorance for the rest of your life are perfectly possible/plausible with a "normal" teenage pregnancy at the time. But one where a baby the *exact* same age as your own turns up murdered pretty much on your doorstep literally days later and it's all the entire country can talk about for months going on years? I'm sorry, I just can't buy into that level of naivete. From anyone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,117 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    The treatment of Joanne Hayes and pressure at home might have persuaded the mother to stay silent.

    The longer you live with a lie the harder it is to come forward, I presume the mother was terrified of the consequences.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,928 ✭✭✭Princess Calla


    What I don't understand is why remain in the area.

    There was either an arrogance that they'd never be caught or a naivete about the situation.

    It was the 80's everyone was emigrating, it wouldn't have raised an eyebrow to leave.

    Now it looks like the chickens are home to roost.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,074 ✭✭✭Deeec


    It still doesnt make it ok that she remained silent for 39 years - she could have came forward over the years and would have been treated compassionately if she hadnt murdered the baby. All she done was gave birth.

    Joanne Hayes life was ruined because of this - she was arrested, abused by gardai, spent time in jail and then had every details of her sex life discussed publicly. She had fingers pointed at her everywhere she went. A normal life was denied to Joanne because baby Johns parents didnt come forward. To this day there are certain members of the gardai that still think Joanne was the mother! Imagine what that was like for Joanne?

    The mother knew what Joanne was being put through and knew she was innocent because the case was so widely discussed by the media. Its not right that this woman/man allowed Joannes life to be ruined - there is no justification for that.

    Fear doesnt justify remaining silent - the mother would have been more respected had she come forward, but she didnt. DNA potentially revealed her/their secret.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,142 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Moving away would just add to the focus I would have said- there’s likely just a small “few” that knew about this pregnancy but we don’t know the full story - there’s the circumstances around the birth itself and then there’s the circumstance of what happened after the birth- we’re not at all clear on either at this point.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,227 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    yes, but the mother could have been abused and beaten by others who didn't want the shame.

    Honestly, at this stage it's all speculation. I'm interested to find out but I hope there's not unnecessary pain caused by this.

    I do wonder, if charged, will the names of the accused be released? Because in cases involving children they're often not.



Advertisement