Timeline Witness B (Mervyn McBride) In the last video we focused on Witness A’s timeline and how it did not make sense. Following on from our last two episodes we now breakdown Witness B’s statement. With his timeline having an anchor point more reliable than Witness A’s this really makes what the prosecution are stating an IMPOSSABILITY! Witness B met two vehicles 100 meters form the Cortamalet school which they had just passed. Witness B confirms this time to be close to 22.30 as he was on the way to the youth club to collect his children at 22.30. This 22.30 time was used by the prosecution in their selectively curated version of the story to paint the picture that Aaron was at both the scene of the crime and the burn site. However, this is IMPOSSIBLE! We know from the previous video’s (episode 3 4) along with MANY other conflicting bits of information up until this point that it is a fact Aaron and Suspect A were at Aaron’s girlfriends house in Cullaville at 23.00. There is NO way ANY OF THIS FITS. As we know Aaron went to his house before even going to his girlfriends’ house. It is very concerning that theprosecution never showed any CCTV of any vehicles passing Cortamalet school at 22.30 we again have to believe a far out version of reality where after committing murder and robbery people pull over on the side of the road for a chat in order to fill the gap of 24 minutes and a distance of only 100 meters. Also note Wittness B mentions that he met a dark VW and said, ‘I believe it had an English plate”. Again, so much contradiction and leaps of faith are needed to draw a conclusion or what do you think is more likely? That all these what ifs happened or that Aaron simply was not involved in the crime and this was NOT the Passat in question.

The prosecution stated that there was
no DNA or Forensic evidence.


Footprints were found behind the wall where the gunman was hiding.


DNA was found on the driver’s door of the Garda car.


DNA was found on a lighter at the alleged burn site.

To this day. No DNA has been identified.

Whilst this was mentioned in the original hearing it BAFFLES me that considering this entire case was based on circumstantial evidence.


Why WAS this detail not given more weight at the time of the verdict being considered ?

The DNA was investigated by specialists and found not to match Aaron, but the prosecution failed to mention this during the trial.

We should also note there was no murder weapon found and the valuables from the robbery were never recovered. 

My son Aaron Brady is no saint, but the following evidence strongly suggests that he was wrongly convicted for a murder that he did not commit.  

The following points cast not just REASONABLE, but STRONG DOUBT on key points of evidence that contributed towards Aaron’s conviction for the murder of Adrian Donohoe.

My strong condolences go to the family, friends, and colleagues of Adrian Donohoe, who will be seeking justice and closure on his murder. But what follows suggests that Aaron is not your man.

Tony Brady - Father of Aaron Brady

To find justice we need to see the whole picture and we can only do that when we have all the facts.

Subscribe for updates as the case develops

Do you have information?

Use this form to contact The Brady Family directly with information relating to Aarons case

Submit your name and email to access case details