From top: Supreme Court judges – with Chief Justice Frank Clarke (centre) – in Waterford this morning; Graham Dwyer

This morning.

In Waterford.

Via RTÉ:

The Supreme Court has said it intends to refer Graham Dwyer’s case over the retention and accessing of his mobile phone metadata to the Court of Justice of the EU.

The court ruled the State’s appeal against convicted murderer Graham Dwyer’s successful challenge to the retention and accessing of mobile phone data.

The seven judges gave their decision in Waterford in a judgment that broadcast live on RTÉ News Now.

…Dwyer’s appeal against his conviction is on hold pending the outcome of these proceedings.

Appeal in Dwyer case referred to EU Court of Justice (RTÉ)

RTE/Rollingnews

UPDATE: The judgment can be read in full here

16 thoughts on “Going To Europe

  1. Dr.Fart

    he murdered a woman. proven without doubt. no appeal should be heard, he has done the crime and been sentenced, any of his shoutings should be ignored as the acts of a desperate man who cannot accept he has to pay for what he’s done.

    Reply
    1. 01101101 01100011

      Hi Fart

      I agree in that respect – he’s about as guilty as it gets and from what I’ve read he appears to possess a very particular mentality that should isolated, let’s hope he continues to rot in prison

      BUT the business of utilising captured data as a pivotal artifact, a direct singular means of proving that guilt (as opposed to being corroborating evidence) isn’t so straightforward as you can see here….the burden of proof has to be heavier than just a data swab imho especially with how digital footprint is becoming so increasingly ingrained in our daily lives

      there’ll be a thesis or two carved off the back of all of this in grad world no doubt

      Reply
    2. 01101101 01100011

      Hi Tringo

      it’s a conundrum no doubt

      see my reply below….imagine you’re the nice family guy at no. 56 who gets wrongly fingered for a child exploitation scenario that might be going on at no. 59

      see what I mean?

      Reply
  2. Brughahaha

    A whole circus trots down to Waterford , to tell us that after over a year , the momentous decision is to send it to the ECJ ….zzz

    It took 13 months to come up with that …and we had to pay mileage costs and expenses of a cavalcade to Waterford , just to hear that.

    Sums up everything that is wrong with this State .Wasteful slow lethargic state that’s deferential to an insular outdated legal system , more about about pantomime and preservation than delivering a competent legal system

    Reply
  3. Nullzero

    This piece of filth (Graham Dwyer) should be locked up for the rest of his natural life without any chance of being released. I lived right beside his victim and saw the pain in her father’s face when he was knocking on our door with his missing person flyers when she disappeared. This creature forfeited his rights when he committed the type of gruesome murder of a troubled person whom he dehumanised for his own pleasure, a soft target for a weak little excuse for a man like him to take advantage of. Boo hoo for him and his “concerns” over this issue. These type of appeals should not be entertained nor allowed to take up time in the courts, locally or in Europe.

    Reply
  4. SB

    “The court ruled the State’s appeal against convicted murderer Graham Dwyer’s successful challenge to the retention and accessing of mobile phone data.”

    Is that even a complete sentence?

    Reply
  5. garrett

    proven without doubt? Not sure of that one, little or no evidence, and if his mobile phone data is inadmissible he’s 100% not proven.

    Reply
  6. Murtles

    The can of worms (and appeals) this will open if it’s overturned. You commit a heinous crime, you forfeit any/all privacy rights.

    Reply
    1. 01101101 01100011

      Hi Murtles

      perhaps but the burning issue as I understand it is can you use his data footprint as the sole pivotal artifact to prove he’s guilty of that despicable act?

      e.g. there’s tons of known published cases whereby the cops have literally ruined someone’s life by getting the wrong IP address from an ISP or sloppiness for a suspect’s house on a street…the problem goes to that level. that incorrectly fingered person is ruined instantly (merely by being a suspect in the first place) whatever the eventual outcome…..tricky territory the bar is very high and there has to be more or else where does it lead, hm?

      it definitely IS a can of worms. the larger issue is how does traditional policing/prosecution methodology stand up in this fast developing digital age?

      Reply
      1. fFs

        It wasn’t just from one source though. It was from multiple sources and all of which traced back to Dwyer. Not even close to one IP address that could be anyone’s. I’m all for the use of any data and the loss of privacy if needed for a case like this – even to discount suspects let alone catch one.

        Reply
  7. Spaghetti Hoop

    Not pleasant to see this evil face in the news again.
    Wonder if this impacts Joe O’Reilly, who was also convicted for murder based on phone evidence but pre-2011.
    One would hope that there is some sort of extreme criminal circumstances whereby phone data can be accessed – I mean who would object to that except the guilty?

    Reply
  8. class wario

    I was actually quite surprised he was convicted at the time due to the somewhat circumstantial nature of a lot of the evidence. Putting this to Europe shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise as jarring as it is to see this lad get a chance at an unearned freedom.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *