McAreavey accused acquitted.

[C. Flower]

The judge seemed to be biased against the accused.

One thing that struck me was that Gorman reported early in the trial that proceedings only went on for half of each day but the day Treebhoowoon was being examined by the prosecution he was reporting that the court was still sitting at 6.00 in the evening and the judge was offering the prosecutor the option of continuing even later. It sonded very much as if he was trying to tire the defendant so that he might be easy to confuse.

From what I've seen, the defendants look like decent men.

Very little comment on the fact that the bell boy who went to open the door left the country and disappeared.

[Baron von Biffo]

From what I've seen, the defendants look like decent men.

Very little comment on the fact that the bell boy who went to open the door left the country and disappeared.

And it was reported that some guests left unexpectedly. Not entirely surprising in the context of a violent murder but something the police ought to have examined none the less.

[bernadette]

And it was reported that some guests left unexpectedly. Not entirely surprising in the context of a violent murder but something the police ought to have examined none the less.

UTV reported that the police didn't even look at the hotels own cctv footage. I would have thought that would be one of the first and easiest jobs.

[Holly]

What puzzles me is that when the innocent defendants were acquitted, the McAreavey family were reported as being disappointed and a bishop relative of the widower expressed a sense of loss. It is as if nothing short of a conviction was what they wanted.

[riposte]

I thought Lyons was going to give Vincent a slap in the face. ( He was criticising the volume of media coverage given to the McAreavey case saying it was OTT)

[bernadette]

What puzzles me is that when the innocent defendants were acquitted, the McAreavey family were reported as being disappointed and a bishop relative of the widower expressed a sense of loss. It is as if nothing short of a conviction was what they wanted.

I think thats totally understandable. The families want closure they probably believed and hoped that these men were the murderers and that they would go to prison for a long time. It didn't happen and now in a way its all over again.

[Kev Bar]

I think thats totally understandable. The families want closure they probably believed and hoped that these men were the murderers and that they would go to prison for a long time. It didn't happen and now in a way its all over again.

Closure is not supposed to mean the slamming the jail door on the innoncent.

[C. Flower]

What puzzles me is that when the innocent defendants were acquitted, the McAreavey family were reported as being disappointed and a bishop relative of the widower expressed a sense of loss. It is as if nothing short of a conviction was what they wanted.

Yes, it is a tragedy for them that she died but I recall similar circumstances in which families have managed to say something positive about innocent people being acquitted. It is hard to see how they could have thought the men were guilty.

RTE did not help by pressing the lawyers for the defence, and on the defendants, for comments on "How the family feels about the verdict."

Why did Tommy O'G not ask the prosecution?

[bernadette]

Closure is not supposed to mean the slamming the jail door on the innoncent.

Don't be silly! The families didn't want the innocent in prisoned, they wanted the men who had been arrested to be the guilty ones. It would not have been closure, I doubt if that is going to happen.

[C. Flower]

The trial reporting was so sketchy, and had such an emphasis on anything that could be read as against the interests of the accused, that it is hard to know what to make of it.

It is unfortunate that inevitably questions will remain over John MacAreavey's role, given that he was the last person known to have seen Michaela MacAreavey and was the person who found her. The bellboy witness has disappeared and did not give evidence. No witnesses were called, it seems, to say what time John MacAreavey left the restaurant. John MacAreavey attempted to retract part of the evidence he gave in the witness stand, the following day, something that is most unusual in a trial, as part of his evidence about events the day before the murder was found to conflict with the door entry data. According to the Independent, the defence has now said that the Mauritian police should question him under caution before he leaves the island. This will undoubtedly provoke outrage in Ireland. Tommy O'Gorman said that the timeline excluded John MacAreavey from possibly involvement but didn't provide the timeline. Really he should, in fairness to John MacAreavey.

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...s-3167383.html

[bernadette]

The trial reporting was so sketchy, and had such an emphasis on anything that could be read as against the interests of the accused, that it is hard to know what to make of it.

It is unfortunate that inevitably questions will remain over John MacAreavey's role, given that he was the last person known to have seen Michaela MacAreavey and was the person who found her. The bellboy witness has disappeared and did not give evidence. No witnesses were called, it seems, to say what time John MacAreavey left the restaurant. John MacAreavey attempted to retract part of the evidence he gave in the witness stand, the following day, something that is most unusual in a trial, as part of his evidence about events the day before the murder was found to conflict with the door entry data. According to the Independent, the defence has now said that the Mauritian police should question him under caution before he leaves the island. This will undoubtedly provoke outrage in Ireland. Tommy O'Gorman said that the timeline excluded John MacAreavey from possibly involvement but didn't provide the timeline. Really he should, in fairness to John MacAreavey.

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...s-3167383.html

All the reporting I saw here during the trial was completely biased. John MacAreavey should have been questioned under caution at the beginning, the time line should have been included with all the evidence. Its what confirms his innocence and very important.

I think that if nothing more proactive can be done it may be that in time John MacAreavey will suffer from the suspicions of others.

[Baron von Biffo]

Tommy Gorman on Plank now.

He seems to have been more persuaded by the prosecution case than the defence.

[C. Flower]

Tommy Gorman on Plank now.

He seems to have been more persuaded by the prosecution case than the defence.

He seemed so from Day One.

[C. Flower]

All the reporting I saw here during the trial was completely biased. John MacAreavey should have been questioned under caution at the beginning, the time line should have been included with all the evidence. Its what confirms his innocence and very important.

I think that if nothing more proactive can be done it may be that in time John MacAreavey will suffer from the suspicions of others.

I agree that this evidence should be presented. The glaring gap is the lack of confirmation (so far as I could see from reports) of the time he left the restaurant/pool area. In a busy hotel, it beggars belief that this couldn't have been established.

Perhaps it was not considered significant, given the emphasis on trying to prove that the two acquitted men were guilty.

John MacAreavey was initially held by the police for 5 hours, according to RTE reports.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-failures.html

I don't know if there was any pressure from the Irish Embassy to release him.
I must say, given what we have heard about the local police, they may have been sympathetic to his position.

Ah - finally a bit of reporting, on the timeline, from an Australian news site. No mention of any confirming witnesses, but there is video of him going to reception at some stage.

Police said that electronic key card records showed a key used by hotel cleaners accessing the room at 2.42pm and a guest's key accessing the room at 2.44pm.

Mr McAreavey told the court that his wife left the restaurant at 2.40pm to go back to their room.

He said that when he went back to the room, at 2.55pm, he could not get in and went to find a bellboy with a spare key. When he entered room 1025 about 3.20pm, he said he found his wife unconscious in the bath with the taps running. Later challenged on his recollection of events, he said: "I will make no excuse for not having each and every detail recorded because at that time it was not at the top of my mind."
....
Mrs McAreavey was the only daughter of Mickey Harte, the manager of Tyrone Gaelic football club since 2003 who has taken the team to three All-Ireland titles.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/worl...614-20b6q.html

[riposte]

The trial reporting was so sketchy, and had such an emphasis on anything that could be read as against the interests of the accused, that it is hard to know what to make of it.

It is unfortunate that inevitably questions will remain over John MacAreavey's role, given that he was the last person known to have seen Michaela MacAreavey and was the person who found her. The bellboy witness has disappeared and did not give evidence. No witnesses were called, it seems, to say what time John MacAreavey left the restaurant. John MacAreavey attempted to retract part of the evidence he gave in the witness stand, the following day, something that is most unusual in a trial, as part of his evidence about events the day before the murder was found to conflict with the door entry data. According to the Independent, the defence has now said that the Mauritian police should question him under caution before he leaves the island. This will undoubtedly provoke outrage in Ireland. Tommy O'Gorman said that the timeline excluded John MacAreavey from possibly involvement but didn't provide the timeline. Really he should, in fairness to John MacAreavey.

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...s-3167383.html

Good points made here. Two of the most important moments in the trial were when John MacAreavey tried to retract some of his evidence when the time card contradicted him ........and when the Judge had to acknowledge that he was acting in a biased manner against the accused and asked the jury to disregard his own interventions.

We have all heard of Judges telling juries to disregard testimony from one side or the other ....... but has anyone ever heard of a judge telling a jury to disregard his own comments.?

It was quite clear that the if the accused had been convicted ..... they would have been acquitted in an appeal .... so the judge was forced to scrub his own "evidence."