Joe O'Reilly

[Uladh]

Now obviously i didn't have the opportunity to sit through all of the evidence (was there any?) but from what i've read, anything pointing the finger at o'reilly was purely circumstantial and tenuous.

The prosecuton's case seems to have centred around his mobile phone being placed in the area of the home on the moring of the murder? Can this really be a soound basis on which to convict a man of murder?

[thebandit]

Yes, when he said he was somewhere else.

[Gnevin]

Now obviously i didn't have the opportunity to sit through all of the evidence (was there any?) but from what i've read, anything pointing the finger at o'reilly was purely circumstantial and tenuous.

The prosecuton's case seems to have centred around his mobile phone being placed in the area of the home on the moring of the murder? Can this really be a soound basis on which to convict a man of murder?

He was asked if had his mobile with him all day he said yes , his mobile said he was near the house . Pretty solid

[cavan4ever]

Now obviously i didn't have the opportunity to sit through all of the evidence (was there any?) but from what i've read, anything pointing the finger at o'reilly was purely circumstantial and tenuous.

The prosecuton's case seems to have centred around his mobile phone being placed in the area of the home on the moring of the murder? Can this really be a soound basis on which to convict a man of murder?

He was asked if had his mobile with him all day he said yes , his mobile said he was near the house . Pretty solid

Jaysus, they put the mobile on the stand. Must have been nerve racking for the poor thing.

Yeah it start to shake anytime someone wanted to ask it a question.

[Kerry Mike]

I was surprised he was convicted without any forensics and it will probably work to his favour if he gets an appeal. It was a strange case but with some of the stuff that came out about him in the papers on Sunday, stuff that was not admitted in court there is little doubt as to his guilt. But it seems he planned the perfect crime everything except the mobile phone.

[Gnevin]

Now obviously i didn't have the opportunity to sit through all of the evidence (was there any?) but from what i've read, anything pointing the finger at o'reilly was purely circumstantial and tenuous.

The prosecuton's case seems to have centred around his mobile phone being placed in the area of the home on the moring of the murder? Can this really be a soound basis on which to convict a man of murder?

He was asked if had his mobile with him all day he said yes , his mobile said he was near the house . Pretty solid

Jaysus, they put the mobile on the stand. Must have been nerve racking for the poor thing.

Yeah it start to shake anytime someone wanted to ask it a question.

[Uladh]

I understand your line of thought and how assumptions can be made from there, but thats hardly grounds for a murder conviction? was there a single scrap of evidence directly connecting him to act itself?

[cavan4ever]

Now obviously i didn't have the opportunity to sit through all of the evidence (was there any?) but from what i've read, anything pointing the finger at o'reilly was purely circumstantial and tenuous.

The prosecuton's case seems to have centred around his mobile phone being placed in the area of the home on the moring of the murder? Can this really be a soound basis on which to convict a man of murder?

As far as i can make out all they had to go on was his mobile records and things he had said and done in the days after the murder. 

[guy crouchback]

it is perfectly ok for someone to be convicted on circumstantial evidence. and any appeal can only be made on a point of law so the lack of forensics murder weapon ect won't effect that.
some famous judge once compared circumstantial evidence to a rope; 'one strand on its own may not hold the weight but 3 or more bound together will'.
in my opinion the f**ker was as guilty as the day is long.

[Uladh]

My inclination would be that he's guilty, but in order to convict him and send him to jail for a lifetime, a prosecution would have to convince me he was guilty

[magpie seanie]

I have zero doubt that the bastard is guilty of murder. I hope he rots in jail.

[Gnevin]

it is perfectly ok for someone to be convicted on circumstantial evidence. and any appeal can only be made on a point of law so the lack of forensics murder weapon ect won't effect that.
some famous judge once compared circumstantial evidence to a rope; 'one strand on its own may not hold the weight but 3 or more bound together will'.
in my opinion the f**ker was as guilty as the day is long.

As Crouchback says
he claims he had the phone all day

His phone was near the house but he says he wasn't near the house . Now someone or something is lying and since phones cant lies he must be . He is lying question is why is he?

[Fear ón Srath Bán]

...But it seems he planned the perfect crime everything except the mobile phone.

A fairly fundamental and stupid mistake on this particular psychopath's part (apparently he had the press in to photograph himself standing in the midst of it all with the blood barely dry on the walls), it's not like there wasn't precedent on this island where mobile phone records didn't form a fairly solid plank of evidence for the prosecution.

[Shamrock Shore]

I have less doubt that Seanie.

[Croí na hÉireann]

But it seems he planned the perfect crime everything except the mobile phone.

It was actually the note in the coffin that persuaded the DPP to bring the case to court. He/She reckoned that the phone records were not enough to get a convinction and weren't going to bring the case forward.

Didn't know too much about the case apart from the odd newsflash and listening to de wimin talking about it. However after reading the papers on Sunday there can be no doubt he's guilty. How his mother can come out and say she know's he didn't do it beggars belief. I know they think the sun shines out of our holes but that woman needs to take a reality check and face up to her shortcomings. Her comment really got under my skin.