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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Mairia Cahill vindicated

13567…11

Comments

  • #62
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I think this is fairly clear that regardless of the perpetrator of said abuse, SF accepts the report that abuse occurred and the victims were failed.

    The final step is that they accept that abuse should be dealt with by state bodies. Until we see that final step (cooperation with the state) we should be sceptical.


  • #63
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Unless you are reading something differently, MLMcD seems to be saying (a) there was abuse against three victims (b) they have been through an ordeal in relation to that abuse (c) SF believes that its procedures require mandatory reporting of abuse and those procedures were not in place at the time of MC's disclosure.

    I think this is fairly clear that regardless of the perpetrator of said abuse, SF accepts the report that abuse occurred and the victims were failed.

    I have said befo4re many times that I have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill. However, hers is one side of the story.
    A man and 4 other defendants await their chance at justice/clearing their names with respect to the Mairia Cahill case.

    Personally I want to see that happen.

    I am glad Liam Adams is in jail.

    If Paudie McGahan's alleged abuser is found guilty in a court of law, he too should go to jail.


  • #64
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I have said befo4re many times that I have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill. However, hers is one side of the story.
    A man and 4 other defendants await their chance at justice/clearing their names with respect to the Mairia Cahill case.
    I'm glad you have come to that realisation, but it seemed that you (like another poster on here) rejected what seems to be a finding of abuse in the report on the basis that nobody was convicted of abuse.

    As I said, just because a person is not convicted of rape does not mean that the victim was not raped. It may mean that the incorrect person was tried, that the prosecution failed to meet the standard of proof, that the jury failed to reach the correct verdict or that the state and its servants were grossly incompetent in collecting and storing evidence resulting in an inability to conduct a proper trial.

    I agree with you, and have at all times made it clear that the alleged perpetrator of that crime is irrelevant in terms of the findings which appear to be contained in the report. One can accept that a victim was abused whilst awaiting the courts to determine whether any or all of the alleged perpetrators were guilty of the abuse.


  • #65
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Far as I know, it is standard proceedure to suspend anyone if allegations are made.

    This from 8 years ago.
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/politics/sinn-fein-not-our-job-to-probe-abuse-claims-109918.html

    It said its policy is to suspend all members suspected of abuse and pass on the details to the police. It cannot be expected to decide whether a person is guilty or not, it said.
    If it standard procedure of the arty I cannot see what rights were infringed. That is the rule of the organsiation, you accept them or don't join.


    I think that is a different case because it involves a public representative.

    Then again, I could be wrong. There are so many cases of child abuse involving Sinn Fein and the IRA that it is hard to keep track. A bit like remembering which diocese had covered up what.


  • #66
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I have said befo4re many times that I have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill.


    Saying that you have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill is not the same as saying that you actively believe her.

    There is a certain element of Schrodinger's Sinn Fein about you, trying to believe two different and opposing things at the same time. If you believe Mairia Cahill, then you believe she was abused by members of the IRA and Sinn Fein, put in front of a kangaroo trial organised by Gerry Adams, and made to face her absuer.

    I have listened to her story, I have listened to Gerry and other SF apologists on the subject, and there is no question in my mind - I believe her completely.

    She is a credible speaker, and on the balance of probabilities - sufficient in a civil court case - I have no doubt that everything that she says happened to her is true.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Unless you disagree with what seems to be contained in the report based on the statements by PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton and the leader of Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald, it seems like you're on the right track here.

    You are wrong.
    What peaked my interest was a report criticising the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints being used to get a dig at SF. It's using Ms. Cahill and her claims for point scoring.
    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Unfortunately, you appear to be incapable of answering some basic questions which have been repeatedly addressed to you on this thread.

    This is an exaggeration. You asked me about my legal qualifications. I've not made any claims. I do not intend on giving over personal information online to anonymous sources.


  • #68
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    You are wrong.
    What peaked my interest was a report criticising the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints being used to get a dig at SF. It's using Ms. Cahill and her claims for point scoring.
    I'm still not convinced you have seen the report.

    This is an exaggeration. You asked me about my legal qualifications.
    Yeah, I seem to recall that was right after you made a silly statement regarding mine...
    I've not made any claims. I do not intend on giving over personal information online to anonymous sources.
    So none then. Cool.


  • #69
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I'm still not convinced you have seen the report.



    Yeah, I seem to recall that was right after you made a silly statement regarding mine...

    So none then. Cool.

    Incorrect again. I asked had you no grasp of the law, based on your comments.
    I've 5 law degrees...or do I? Pointless grandstanding. My ego needs no such boost.


  • #70
    Pkiernan
    Registered Users Posts: 4,315 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    Havockk wrote: »
    PONI report very damning to PSNI. Yet I've now read about 3 articles and this post who want to focus on SF. Blatant politicking. The real story of course being just how badly the PSNI let a victim down.

    Let's not forget Sinn Fein doing a Catholic Church style cover up of child rapists...


  • #71
    blackwhite
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Incorrect again. I asked had you no grasp of the law, based on your comments.
    I've 5 law degrees...or do I? Pointless grandstanding. My ego needs no such boost.

    Yet it always seems to need the boost of making petty, snide personal digs anytime a question is asked that you want to avoid :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    You are wrong.
    What peaked my interest was a report criticising the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints being used to get a dig at SF. It's using Ms. Cahill and her claims for point scoring.


    .

    The report did more than criticise the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints. It also set out some truths about what happened her, truths that people like you and Francie and Gerry Adams and the rest of the "republican" community have repeatedly denied.

    At the end of the day, Mairia Cahill has been treated very badly by a lot of people.

    She has been treated very badly by the PSNI who failed to investigate her complaints properly. She was treated worse by Sinn Fein who protected her abuser and repeatedly denied any knowledge of her abuse. She was treated worse again by the IRA who subjected her to a kangaroo court and put her in front of her abuser. Finally, she was treated worst of all by the man who abused her, a man who got the full protection of the "republican" community.

    And he wasn't the only one who got the protection of the "republican" community. Liam Adams was another one, helpfully given a job working with children in another jurisdiction to the one in which he committed the abuse, so was Paudie McGahon's abuser, moved on to other safe houses.


  • #73
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Saying that you have no reason to disbelieve Mairia Cahill is not the same as saying that you actively believe her.

    There is a certain element of Schrodinger's Sinn Fein about you, trying to believe two different and opposing things at the same time. If you believe Mairia Cahill, then you believe she was abused by members of the IRA and Sinn Fein, put in front of a kangaroo trial organised by Gerry Adams, and made to face her absuer.

    I have listened to her story, I have listened to Gerry and other SF apologists on the subject, and there is no question in my mind - I believe her completely.

    She is a credible speaker, and on the balance of probabilities - sufficient in a civil court case - I have no doubt that everything that she says happened to her is true.

    I believe Mairia Cahill's story. But that is as far as it goes. If her alleged abuser can prove that she is wrong, then I can no longer believe her.

    There is a side to the story missing here. Unlike others, I am not ready to hang somebody without hearing their side.
    As far as I am aware, Gerry and what you call other SF apologists were not there when the offences are alleged to have taken place.
    Although to listen to some, you would think they were present and actively participating at all these alleged events.


  • #74
    marieholmfan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,744 ✭✭✭marieholmfan


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Incorrect again. I asked had you no grasp of the law, based on your comments.
    I've 5 law degrees...or do I? Pointless grandstanding. My ego needs no such boost.
    Actually in this specific instance it is useful information.


  • #75
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    I don't post in Politics much but this story shows exactly why SF wont ever get a sizeable mandate. I like Mary Lou but in my mind SF are still a very dodgy outfit. The lies out of Adams and the way they treated Maria Cahill are just disturbing. Instead of admitting the truth about the child abuse, they tried to destroy her and threw a smokescreen around her. Its like what the Gardai did to McCabe. I am glad Adams is gone but they really need to come clean on all their skeletons.


  • #76
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    The report did more than criticise the PSNI's handling of Ms. Cahill's complaints. It also set out some truths about what happened her, truths that people like you and Francie and Gerry Adams and the rest of the "republican" community have repeatedly denied.

    At the end of the day, Mairia Cahill has been treated very badly by a lot of people.

    She has been treated very badly by the PSNI who failed to investigate her complaints properly. She was treated worse by Sinn Fein who protected her abuser and repeatedly denied any knowledge of her abuse. She was treated worse again by the IRA who subjected her to a kangaroo court and put her in front of her abuser. Finally, she was treated worst of all by the man who abused her, a man who got the full protection of the "republican" community.
    In fairness, a man, and 4 other defendants turned up at the court to defend themselves. He didn't get the chance, the reasons are contained in today's report.
    I know the civil liberties of republicans are not important to some, but they are to me anyway. Everyone has the right to vindicate themselves, regardless of creed or colour or political persuasion.

    And he wasn't the only one who got the protection of the "republican" community. Liam Adams was another one, helpfully given a job working with children in another jurisdiction to the one in which he committed the abuse, so was Paudie McGahon's abuser, moved on to other safe houses.

    Liam Adams is in jail where he should be. His brother has apologised and admitted he did some wrong things in handling that. His party membership accepted that and allowed him continue in his role.

    McGahan's alleged abuser whereabouts was known and was within reach of the Gardai anytime they wanted to prosecute, to date they still haven't mounted a prosecution here. What possible reasons could there be for that?


  • #77
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    I don't post in Politics much but this story shows exactly why SF wont ever get a sizeable mandate. I like Mary Lou but in my mind SF are still a very dodgy outfit. The lies out of Adams and the way they treated Maria Cahill are just disturbing. Instead of admitting the truth about the child abuse, they tried to destroy her and threw a smokescreen around her. Its like what the Gardai did to McCabe. I am glad Adams is gone but they really need to come clean on all their skeletons.

    You can check the relevant thread, but at the start of this, it was SF's fault that the case collapsed in some people's eyes here. They were blocking it apparently.
    As so often is the case, time has brought the truth to the surface, it was a failure of the RUC/PSNI that led to the case collapsing.


  • #78
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You can check the relevant thread, but at the start of this, it was SF's fault that the case collapsed in some people's eyes here. They were blocking it apparently.
    As so often is the case, time has brought the truth to the surface, it was a failure of the RUC/PSNI that led to the case collapsing.


    You are only just short of saying that a member of the RUC committed the abuse.


  • #79
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blackwhite wrote: »
    Yet it always seems to need the boost of making petty, snide personal digs anytime a question is asked that you want to avoid :rolleyes:

    Snide you say? Medice, cura te ipsum, (Physician, heal thyself).
    marieholmfan wrote: »
    Actually in this specific instance it is useful information.

    Actually it might be if I were pontificating on here claiming to have numerous law degrees and using that claim to support flawed conclusions.

    The PSNI did Ms. Cahill a disservice. Why this thread is more about SF, is low grade political point scoring IMO.


  • #80
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    You are only just short of saying that a member of the RUC committed the abuse.

    Nice try. But that is a complete fabrication. Like many others, the RUC/PSNI had their eyes on somebody else, not the alleged victim at all. The victim never matters to those who want that somebody else.


  • #81
    splinter65
    Registered Users Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    If you extrapolate the logic contained at post 47 in terms of what they allege the report says, SF have apologised for structural incompetence within the PSNI. Which is, admittedly, an odd thing for SF to apologise about.

    Odd indeed....


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,396 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    They turned up last time and released a statement saying they wanted the chance to clear their names. No lie there.

    And the news this morning claimed the defendant was still protesting his innocence.

    Good job there isn't mandatory hanging here on the basis of allegations.

    Or bullets to the head and a shallow grave like your beloved SF/IRA would dish out.


  • #83
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    This is mad stuff altogether. People in this thread are defending SF’s role in this terrible series of events by placing the blame on the PSNI.


  • #84
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    You mean.like SF/IRA due process?

    Interesting you should mention it because Cahill said to Suzanne Breen in a Sunday Tribune article dated January 2010:
    I never wanted M killed. I wanted him tied to railings in Ballymurphy with a placard around his neck saying he was a rapist.

    Now if this had actually been done, I wonder what would have happened after that? Seems to me she had no problem accepting 'IRA due process' up to a certain point, so her pronouncements on IRA violence are a tad hypocritical to me.


  • #85
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    garhjw wrote: »
    This is mad stuff altogether. People in this thread are defending SF’s role in this terrible series of events by placing the blame on the PSNI.

    eh, I think the PSNI have blamed themselves actually.


  • #86
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    I believe Maria Cahill is telling the whole truth. 100%. Brave woman. She says she is still getting trolled by SF fanatics.

    Q. Do we know the identity of the IRA man who abused her?


  • #87
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    17-pdr wrote: »
    Interesting you should mention it because Cahill said to Suzanne Breen in a Sunday Tribune article dated January 2010:



    Now if this had actually been done, I wonder what would have happened after that? Seems to me she had no problem accepting 'IRA due process' up to a certain point, so her pronouncements on IRA violence are a tad hypocritical to me.

    Shocking news: Young woman raped and traumatised, still suffering wants vengenance on her abuser.

    Disgusting victim blaming by another SF apologist.

    FACT: A member of Sinn Fein abused Mairia Cahill
    FACT: The IRA subjected her to a kangaroo court process
    FACT: Sinn Fein protected him, like many other child abusers and rapists
    FACT: The IRA moved child abusers to other jurisdictions as Gerry Adams admitted in a blog post
    FACT: Sinn Fein later expelled the member involved in child abuse
    FACT: Sinn Fein have never passed on the information they have about child abuse to the relevant authorities.


  • #88
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Sycamore Tree wrote: »
    I believe Maria Cahill is telling the whole truth. 100%. Brave woman. She says she is still getting trolled by SF fanatics.


    We can see that on here, there are quite a few of them engaged in victim-blaming.


  • #89
    piplip87
    Registered Users Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭piplip87


    #ibelieveher


  • #90
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,157 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    piplip87 wrote: »
    #ibelieveher


    +1


    #ibelieveher


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 66,783 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Shocking news: Young woman raped and traumatised, still suffering wants vengenance on her abuser.

    Disgusting victim blaming by another SF apologist.

    FACT: A member of Sinn Fein abused Mairia Cahill
    FACT: The IRA subjected her to a kangaroo court process
    FACT: Sinn Fein protected him, like many other child abusers and rapists
    FACT: The IRA moved child abusers to other jurisdictions as Gerry Adams admitted in a blog post
    FACT: Sinn Fein later expelled the member involved in child abuse
    FACT: Sinn Fein have never passed on the information they have about child abuse to the relevant authorities.

    Why are you trying to cover up the fact that MC asked that the IRA get involved and attacking a poster for stating the truth?


Advertisement