Register to Comment
Page 182 of 183 FirstFirst ... 82132172180181182183 LastLast
Results 1,811 to 1,820 of 1830
Like Tree1111Likes
  1. #1811
    nationalsday nationalsday is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,298

    Quote Originally Posted by Catalpast View Post
    It was not a Criminal Trial with the powers to convict anyone

    - it was a Tribunal

    This is pretty basic stuff BTW....
    She has never had a basic clue about anything to do with this case, and all of her commentary has been infantile (if you'll excuse the pun). I actually made the mistake of taking her seriously and I gave her detailed answers to her inane questions until it dawned on me that there is either a low iq issue or that she is just trolling.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #1812
    Dearghoul Dearghoul is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    7,613

    Quote Originally Posted by nationalsday View Post
    They aren't my accusations, carpenter, they are the findings of the Tribunal of Inquiry. How bright do you have to be to understand that simple fact?

    Please feel free, though, to argue against the findings. Read the Report, perhaps, while you are planing down the leg of a stool.. - its all yours to download now for free

    Go on there - give us a bit of your gnomic wisdom on the whole affair. I'm all ears.
    I don't think reading the report is any guarantee of understanding how Lynch came to the conclusions he did on this matter.

    I don't know if you're aware of it, but the Tribunals findings have come into question a bit of late.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #1813
    nationalsday nationalsday is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,298

    Quote Originally Posted by Dearghoul View Post
    I don't think reading the report is any guarantee of understanding how Lynch came to the conclusions he did on this matter.

    I don't know if you're aware of it, but the Tribunals findings have come into question a bit of late.
    But what exact question, though?

    Fantastic comment though and great advice (I wouldn't have expected anything less of yourself)- don't read the Report but just kind of "know" of what might be the issues concerned from getting a "vibe" from listening to stuff and maybe having an occasional glance or sort of a read about odd bits and pieces about the case - picking up bits of things about the scandal as you amble along. Stuff like that..

    I wouldn't like to be waiting for a finished chair from you.

    As I have stated before on this thread, carpenter, if some journalist, commentator or politician would actually definitively point out the part of the report of which the Judge purportedly got all wrong all of those years ago then things would make a little more sense. At least don't be running off and handing over compensation until this is made very clear to the public. Otherwise, as it stands the polemic is just hyperbole.

    I'm afraid that the Judge got it all right as far as I can see, having taken the trouble to actually read the Report and to comprehend the issues involved.

    Btw I notice that you haven't offered even one logical or topical or in any way constructive criticism of the report yourself, carpenter?
    Last edited by nationalsday; 13th February 2018 at 12:16 AM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #1814
    Dearghoul Dearghoul is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    7,613

    Quote Originally Posted by nationalsday View Post
    But what exact question, though?

    Fantastic comment though and great advice (I wouldn't have expected anything less of yourself)- don't read the Report but just kind of "know" of what might be the issues concerned from getting a "vibe" from listening to stuff and maybe having an occasional glance or sort of a read about odd bits and pieces about the case - picking up bits of things about the scandal as you amble along. Stuff like that..

    I wouldn't like to be waiting for a finished chair from you.

    As I have stated before on this thread, carpenter, if some journalist, commentator or politician would actually definitively point out the part of the report of which the Judge purportedly got all wrong all of those years ago then things would make a little more sense. At least don't be running off and handing over compensation until this is made very clear to the public. Otherwise, as it stands the polemic is just hyperbole.

    I'm afraid that the Judge got it all right as far as I can see, having taken the trouble to actually read the Report and to comprehend the issues involved.

    Btw I notice that you haven't offered even one logical or topical or in any way constructive criticism of the report yourself, carpenter?
    You're beginning to sound like Herod

    No, I've read the report some time back.

    What you interpret as ambling along is a concern not to rush to judgement, a concern I see you don't share.

    The question you continue to deflect from is how Lynch came to the conclusions about the death of Joanne Hayes baby without supporting evidence.
    Last edited by Dearghoul; 13th February 2018 at 12:34 AM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #1815
    nationalsday nationalsday is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,298

    Quote Originally Posted by Dearghoul View Post
    You're beginning to sound like Herod

    No, I've read the report some time back.

    What you interpret as ambling along is a concern not to rush to judgement, a concern I see you don't share.

    The question you continue to deflect from is how Lynch came to the conclusions about the death of Joanne Hayes baby without supporting evidence.
    I will certainly debate the issues with you, if you are not just trolling, but I have already set out in considerable detail on this thread as to why the Judge came to the conclusions which he did. I am not going to the trouble of repeating them. Most commentators have not read the report because up until general access to the internet the Report was only available in legal and university libraries, or else to purchase in the government publications office in Molesworth Street - I don't think that there was ever a huge rush on the last option. But you must have specifically gone in and purchased your copy then, eh?

    If you have read the report (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt) then you will know that there was supporting evidence from Bride Fuller, Mary Hayes: Kathleen Hayes; Dr. Harbison and Dr. Fennelley. The Judge didn't just idly come to those conclusions. He also wasn't trying a criminal trial to prove the facts beyond a reasonable doubt - he in fact acquired to himself a higher standard than proof based upon reasonable probability to one of substantial probability which was a hybrid of the two standards. His only function was to find out what the facts were objectively and he did a very good job of that.

    (hardly that your are "Jesus" btw given your uncharitable previous track record of hate posts towards the Travelling Community. It is just that you keep consistently reminding other posters that you work as a carpenter. I find the social justice warrior hat which you are wearing on this thread to be a little hypocritical)
    Last edited by nationalsday; 13th February 2018 at 01:27 AM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #1816
    Dearghoul Dearghoul is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    7,613

    Quote Originally Posted by nationalsday View Post
    I will certainly debate the issues with you, if you are not just trolling, but I have already set out in considerable detail on this thread as to why the Judge came to the conclusions which he did. I am not going to the trouble of repeating them. Most commentators have not read the report because up until general access to the internet the Report was only available in legal and university libraries, or else to purchase in the government publications office in Molesworth Street - I don't think that there was ever a huge rush on the last option. But you must have specifically gone in and purchased your copy then, eh?

    If you have read the report (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt) then you will know that there was supporting evidence from Bride Fuller, Mary Hayes: Kathleen Hayes; Dr. Harbison and Dr. Fennelley. The Judge didn't just idly come to those conclusions. He also wasn't trying a criminal trial to prove the facts beyond a reasonable doubt - he in fact acquired to himself a higher standard than proof based upon reasonable probability to one of substantial probability which was a hybrid of the two standards. His only function was to find out what the facts were objectively and he did a very good job of that.

    (hardly that your are "Jesus" btw given your uncharitable previous track record of hate posts towards the Travelling Community. It is just that you keep consistently reminding other posters that you work as a carpenter. I find the social justice warrior hat which you are wearing on this thread to be a little hypocritical)

    More old flannel. It seems we won't get past the 'in the absence of medical evidence as to the cause of death'. Dr Harbison didn't feel he could attest to cause of death. What bearing then have the testimonies of the rest on the point, even Dr. Fenelly, a psychiatrist.

    As to the travelling community that you've dragged in somehow, I might have a less prejudiced view than someone whose livelihood is dependant on it.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #1817
    RasherHash RasherHash is offline
    RasherHash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    22,784

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #1818
    nationalsday nationalsday is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,298

    Quote Originally Posted by Dearghoul View Post
    More old flannel. It seems we won't get past the 'in the absence of medical evidence as to the cause of death'. Dr Harbison didn't feel he could attest to cause of death. What bearing then have the testimonies of the rest on the point, even Dr. Fenelly, a psychiatrist.

    As to the travelling community that you've dragged in somehow, I might have a less prejudiced view than someone whose livelihood is dependant on it.
    "more old flannel" - I could also ask you to directly source your quote of 'in the absence of medical evidence as to cause of death' - who actually said that?

    I just told you that it wasn't a criminal trial, and I also sourced where the evidence for the death of the of the Tralee baby derived. How difficult is that to understand?

    Dr. Harbison said in evidence that he could not determine as to whether the baby drew breath because the body had decomposed having lain in water for two weeks. He also said the the umbilical cord had been cleanly cut which corresponded with the testimony of Bridie Fuller who said that not only did she cut the cord with a scissors in the bedroom, but that the baby was alive and had trouble breathing. What this medical evidence does is to directly contradict Joanne Hayes evidence of pulling the umbilical cord with her hands in her field birth story, and entirely contradicts the evidence of her aunt who was physically present at the birth.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #1819
    KEYHOLE KATE KEYHOLE KATE is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,688

    We haven't heard of children being killed as an act of revenge by one partner against the other? We haven't heard of "revenge porn" either? Not back in the early l980s but primal passions still existed, How is it that Jeremiah Locke is not being blamed for anything although he scattered his seed indiscriminately between his wife and his part-time lover? joanne Hayes knew she could not have him as at that time divorce had not been legalised in Ireland. As well, the Children's Allowance was paid to the husband so Jeremiah would have more money for fun and frolics than his meagre wages at the Tralee Centre would have allowed. He was able to lie low from Nell McCafferty's waspish tongue because she had "other fish to fry"'
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #1820
    Eoin Coir Eoin Coir is offline
    Eoin Coir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16,438

    Quote Originally Posted by KEYHOLE KATE View Post
    We haven't heard of children being killed as an act of revenge by one partner against the other? We haven't heard of "revenge porn" either? Not back in the early l980s but primal passions still existed, How is it that Jeremiah Locke is not being blamed for anything although he scattered his seed indiscriminately between his wife and his part-time lover? joanne Hayes knew she could not have him as at that time divorce had not been legalised in Ireland. As well, the Children's Allowance was paid to the husband so Jeremiah would have more money for fun and frolics than his meagre wages at the Tralee Centre would have allowed. He was able to lie low from Nell McCafferty's waspish tongue because she had "other fish to fry"'
    True indeed, Jeremiah the prophet and seed distributor has not featured at all
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment