The Kerry Babies Case

[SoundMan]

Why do you keep asking such stupid questions?

Of course he was wrong, I never suggested anything to the contrary. Nor did anyone else.

What an idiotic fucking question ..

So judges DO get things wrong. Glad we got there in the end!

 

[SoundMan]

Not sure where you're going with this.

Their child who donated the DNA voluntarily presumably did not know.

I don't think it was the child's mother, so the next logical suspicion would be someone in the mother's immediate family. Whoever it was, it has been kep quiet a long time, which, to my thinking, would correspond with very few people knowing what happened for sure, perhaps just the mother and whoever did it.

And that was my point which you tried to contradict. There was more than the young mother knew about it but it was successfully covered up for 40 years!

 

[Matlock]

So judges DO get things wrong. Glad we got there in the end!

No one apart from you would need that clarified.

Why do you think there are appeal courts...

 

[doppellanger]

And that was my point which you tried to contradict. There was more than the young mother knew about it but it was successfully covered up for 40 years!

It's all in the realm of speculation you fool.

I use words like 'I guess...', 'I think...' to indicate I'm speculating. You make these statements like they're fact but you don't know, I don't know, Mattie doesn't know, the only people or person who knows is or are not talking.

 

[Matlock]

And that was my point which you tried to contradict. There was more than the young mother knew about it but it was successfully covered up for 40 years!

That is not the point you were making. You were clearly suggesting garda collusion.

 

[SoundMan]

No one apart from you would need that clarified.

Why do you think there are appeal courts...

One can always appeal over matters of law, but not always on matters of justice.

You can never bring yourself to admit that there's a difference between the two and that our Courts of Law aren't necessarily courts of justice.

Here we had a learned High Court judge presiding for months over all the known evidence presented to him and you now admit he got it wrong. Not did he only get it wrong, he added insult to the actual injuries suffered by JH and her family.

And yet we have you pontificating and accusing others of trying to run some narrative without being in possession of all of the facts. Funny how a High Court judge in possession of all the facts came to the conclusion the Gardai involved did nothing wrong isn't it. He was even subsequently elevated to the Supreme Court. This all happened in the Real World, not online in some talkpage.

But meanwhile on a local talk page where people are encouraged to post up their opinions - it goes without saying that nobody here has all the evidence - you come over all injured innocence and try to berate others as "running with an agenda".

Your agenda here seems pretty obvious - whatever else happens don't ANYBODY EVER question the Judiciary, and/or even suggest that our Courts are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice. Frequently they dole out just decisions, of that there is no doubt - but not always as some might have us believe.

If decisions of law made in and by the courts aren't all just, then de facto there is a difference between Law and justice. And what we have are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice.

 

[dennisfallen]

One can always appeal over matters of law, but not always on matters of justice.

You can never bring yourself to admit that there's a difference between the two and that our Courts of Law aren't necessarily courts of justice.

Here we had a learned High Court judge presiding for months over all the known evidence presented to him and you now admit he got it wrong. Not did he only get it wrong, he added insult to the actual injuries suffered by JH and her family.

And yet we have you pontificating and accusing others of trying to run some narrative without being in possession of all of the facts. Funny how a High Court judge in possession of all the facts came to the conclusion the Gardai involved did nothing wrong isn't it. He was even subsequently elevated to the Supreme Court. This all happened in the Real World, not online in some talkpage.

But meanwhile on a local talk page where people are encouraged to post up their opinions - it goes without saying that nobody here has all the evidence - you come over all injured innocence and try to berate others as "running with an agenda".

Your agenda here seems pretty obvious - whatever else happens don't ANYBODY EVER question the Judiciary, and/or even suggest that our Courts are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice. Frequently they dole out just decisions, of that there is no doubt - but not always as some might have us believe.

If decisions of law made in and by the courts aren't all just, then de facto there is a difference between Law and justice. And what we have are Courts of Law, not Courts of Just

 

[RebelBOK]

One can always appeal over matters of law, but not always on matters of justice.

You can never bring yourself to admit that there's a difference between the two and that our Courts of Law aren't necessarily courts of justice.

Here we had a learned High Court judge presiding for months over all the known evidence presented to him and you now admit he got it wrong. Not did he only get it wrong, he added insult to the actual injuries suffered by JH and her family.

And yet we have you pontificating and accusing others of trying to run some narrative without being in possession of all of the facts. Funny how a High Court judge in possession of all the facts came to the conclusion the Gardai involved did nothing wrong isn't it. He was even subsequently elevated to the Supreme Court. This all happened in the Real World, not online in some talkpage.

But meanwhile on a local talk page where people are encouraged to post up their opinions - it goes without saying that nobody here has all the evidence - you come over all injured innocence and try to berate others as "running with an agenda".

Your agenda here seems pretty obvious - whatever else happens don't ANYBODY EVER question the Judiciary, and/or even suggest that our Courts are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice. Frequently they dole out just decisions, of that there is no doubt - but not always as some might have us believe.

If decisions of law made in and by the courts aren't all just, then de facto there is a difference between Law and justice. And what we have are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice.

You are the only one with an obvious agenda here Soundy_y, you are clearly using Mattie as a punching bag for your obvious dissatisfaction with the judiciary system.

At no point over the course of your discussion has Matlock proclaimed, as you said, "no matter what happened the gardai and judicial system is always right".

What she said was "No proof of a conspiracy to cover up as yet" which is true, there is no proof of anything yet.
To which you responded with what you perceive as proof by saying "They now seem (through their lawyer) to accept they were the parents of baby john."
They "SEEM to accept", does that sound factual or speculative to you?

The only point she has consistently made is that until the full facts of the case are revealed, it is all speculation.

 

[Matlock]

One can always appeal over matters of law, but not always on matters of justice.

You can never bring yourself to admit that there's a difference between the two and that our Courts of Law aren't necessarily courts of justice.

Here we had a learned High Court judge presiding for months over all the known evidence presented to him and you now admit he got it wrong. Not did he only get it wrong, he added insult to the actual injuries suffered by JH and her family.

And yet we have you pontificating and accusing others of trying to run some narrative without being in possession of all of the facts. Funny how a High Court judge in possession of all the facts came to the conclusion the Gardai involved did nothing wrong isn't it. He was even subsequently elevated to the Supreme Court. This all happened in the Real World, not online in some talkpage.

But meanwhile on a local talk page where people are encouraged to post up their opinions - it goes without saying that nobody here has all the evidence - you come over all injured innocence and try to berate others as "running with an agenda".

Your agenda here seems pretty obvious - whatever else happens don't ANYBODY EVER question the Judiciary, and/or even suggest that our Courts are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice. Frequently they dole out just decisions, of that there is no doubt - but not always as some might have us believe.

If decisions of law made in and by the courts aren't all just, then de facto there is a difference between Law and justice. And what we have are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice.

One can always appeal over matters of law, but not always on matters of justice.

You can never bring yourself to admit that there's a difference between the two and that our Courts of Law aren't necessarily courts of justice.

Here we had a learned High Court judge presiding for months over all the known evidence presented to him and you now admit he got it wrong. Not did he only get it wrong, he added insult to the actual injuries suffered by JH and her family.

And yet we have you pontificating and accusing others of trying to run some narrative without being in possession of all of the facts. Funny how a High Court judge in possession of all the facts came to the conclusion the Gardai involved did nothing wrong isn't it. He was even subsequently elevated to the Supreme Court. This all happened in the Real World, not online in some talkpage.

But meanwhile on a local talk page where people are encouraged to post up their opinions - it goes without saying that nobody here has all the evidence - you come over all injured innocence and try to berate others as "running with an agenda".

Your agenda here seems pretty obvious - whatever else happens don't ANYBODY EVER question the Judiciary, and/or even suggest that our Courts are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice. Frequently they dole out just decisions, of that there is no doubt - but not always as some might have us believe.

If decisions of law made in and by the courts aren't all just, then de facto there is a difference between Law and justice. And what we have are Courts of Law, not Courts of Justice.

No matter how many times you repeat this nonsense, it doesn't make it any less idiotic.

The rest is covered by RebelBOK

 

[JimmyBarrySmurph]

I've already seen this speculation. With a knitting needle apparently.

No needle. Report from Gene Kerrigan Indo 2009.

“The baby had been alive for perhaps 24 hours when someone killed him. During that time, he was washed but not fed. The baby's neck was broken, but that wasn't fatal. There were 28 knife wounds, most of them shallow, hesitation wounds, in which the knife was pulled back at the last second. Mostly wounds to the neck. Then the fatal wounds in which the knife was plunged four times into the heart. One might conclude that the killing happened in a mixture of desperation, depression and frenzy. It's not known to this day who did it”

No needle. A needle was used to murder Cynthia Owens baby in Dalkey allegedly. That’s maybe where the confusion arises.