Lurgan

[nrico2006]

Is he the boyfriend/father of child?

[Kidder81]

So your man McCullagh "found her body" the next day so obviously had access to the house ? But wouldn't assist police with their enquiries.

[seafoid]

Huge investigative job to link him to the murder. It must be a relief to the family.

[Milltown Row2]

So basically from what I can gather he'd been recently dating her, so obviously had access to her house, set up an online gaming 'live' video gaming thing with people on it that would have seen him, though during the session it had 'issues' with chatting during it 'technical' issues and this was his alibi.

This was forensically checked and seen to be incorrect. Staged. He'd been at the parents house after the murder and left his phone on purpose to record or hear how the investigation was going and what her parents where thinking, later went back and retrieved it.

If this was the case it's looks like premeditated

Being with the family, comforting them. Christ!

So many murderers know the victim.

[Sportacus]

Might be wiser to shut this thread down and let the court do its job. I see a lot of warnings today about not commenting online.

[Milltown Row2]

Might be wiser to shut this thread down and let the court do its job. I see a lot of warnings today about not commenting online.

This was just from the news though

[Sportacus]

Might be wiser to shut this thread down and let the court do its job. I see a lot of warnings today about not commenting online.

This was just from the news though

Fair enough, but just generally it feels like speculation and assumption will come into it.

[David McKeown]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

[Sportacus]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

The warnings are from the Attorney General's Office.  I'm sure they have quite a lot more experience of what can jeopardise a legal conviction that anyone on here.

[WT4E]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

The warnings are from the Attorney General's Office.  I'm sure they have quite a lot more experience of what can jeopardise a legal conviction that anyone on here.

To be fair David McKeown knows his stuff

[Armagh18]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

The warnings are from the Attorney General's Office.  I'm sure they have quite a lot more experience of what can jeopardise a legal conviction that anyone on here.

Apparently comments online can prejudice a jury and can be used to get a mistrial? Not 100% sure.

[Milltown Row2]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

The warnings are from the Attorney General's Office.  I'm sure they have quite a lot more experience of what can jeopardise a legal conviction that anyone on here.

Apparently comments online can prejudice a jury and can be used to get a mistrial? Not 100% sure.

Be better asking someone who knows the law, now let me think....

[Armagh18]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

The warnings are from the Attorney General's Office.  I'm sure they have quite a lot more experience of what can jeopardise a legal conviction that anyone on here.

Apparently comments online can prejudice a jury and can be used to get a mistrial? Not 100% sure.

Be better asking someone who knows the law, now let me think....

Not you anyway

Just speaking from experience, I know that the big manchester united forums banned any gossip about the Greenwood case, purely to be on the safe side and cover their own ass. Agree with David that the warnings go too far as far as i can tell!

[nrico2006]

Nothing wrong with discussing a major crime committed so nearby, I'm sure there is more shite being fired out verbally than there is typed online. It's not North Korea we live in.

[NAG1]

Unfortunately for this poor family it was their daughter that fell victim to this sick individual. With the level of obvious premeditation its seems to have a matter of when rather than IF this type of crime was going to come from the person involved.