Touts are everywhere

Way back, when the occupying power, as James Galway describes it, decided to recruit pro- agreement people and place them in law , administration, business and other key places, they must also have thought about journalists and politicians .

Our local journalists are keen to write articles about  who might have been a tout, loyalist or republican but how many of them are state agents? Imagine the access they have to the inner workings of the terrorists. See Kim Philby’s career. When the SIS ‘ditched’ him , they sent him to Beirut under cover as a journalist for the Observer and the Economist. So, shall we have an article , outing journalists or is that beyond the Pale?

Politicians. Most of Sinn Fein/IRA lost the opportunity for education by being banged up. The loyalists, on the other hand availed of third level education. A favourite fishing ground for Box and SIS is Oxbridge. Who went there?…No! Surely not!

Let’s think who else would be useful. A lawyer! They have access to all sorts of information. Perhaps someone transgressed and men came at dead of night and said, “well Paddy/ William, no more will be heard of this little problem but we’d like some information from you, from time to time”. Such information, about their clients, from a barrister or solicitor, would be priceless. What would be the reward? Judicial office?

Then there is that mass of mostly dead wood who inhabit  all sorts of NGOs. Check out their bios and you will find that they are re-cycled at an alarming rate. What they have in common is “sit down you’re rocking the boat”. For this view the NIO and the OFMDFM rewards them handsomely. Frank Cushnahan comes to mind for a reason that I can’t quite put my finger on. Many rose without a trace  from the University of Ulster. Sport NI is just the tip of the toxic iceberg.

So, come on you journos, let’s be having you!

Advertisements

The wonderful world of the PPS

Aside from the considerable interest the press and public would have taken had Barra appeared as a witness for the defence or the prosecution  [see Larkin para 4.49-4.51] in the trial of Liam Adams, a number of other points arise from the Starmer and Larkin reports.

1. Why was Gerry Adams, Barra’s former client, not called in the second trial? The answer to the justice committee from the Deputy director was “technical reasons” [ a well known legal term] and the volume of potential disclosure. One wonders if this disclosure related to Gerry’s terrorist activities and/or his usefulness to the state. It may well be another example of where intelligence held by the state intrudes into the administration of justice.

2. Whilst taking responsibility for the AA/BB/Cahill shambles Barra blamed the two prosecuting barristers. Asked by the justice committee about his civil servants , his response was that of the three involved , one had retired and the other two were not in the places they had been when the events happened. This is an obscure remark. Does it mean that they have been sent to the PPS equivalent of the Russian Front or Siberia? He went on to tell the committee that neither would be disciplined because their actions “did not raise issues of indiscipline”. So there you have it. No harm will befall the civil servants, they will eventually retire on their inflation proofed pensions. Meanwhile they may be performing incompetently in your case, dear reader. Their names have never been made public. Meanwhile the two barristers face a public disciplinary hearing.

3. Moving on from that demimonde , Barra was asked a number of questions by Edwin Poots. Barra initially declined to respond when Poots  asked him what ‘he put his thing in me” might mean. Having unsuccessfully appealed to the chairman for protection, he stated that it was a description of penetration. Poots point was that that remark by the complainant re Liam, her father, constituted a complaint of rape and that it had been heard by Gerry, bringing him within the ambit of the then legislation on with holding information. Larkin concluded that Aine’s evidence re Gerry called at the very least for clarification.

4. Alban Maginness told Barra that Larkin’s report gave the PPS “a clean bill of health”. Let’s examine that. The real nub of the PPS performance is set out by Larkin at paras 6.17- 6.22. Larkin notes that in relation to the assessment of the evidence against Gerry, neither the acting director nor senior counsel appear, from the acting deputy director’s minute, to have been provided with the two transcribed interviews of Aine. Nor did senior counsel have access to a minute from the directing officer. So , another PPS communication failure. Larkin was not asked to comment on the decision not to prosecute Gerry but it is clear that had communications been working properly , at the least the PPS would have sought clarification from Aine or Gerry. Larkin describes the “obvious steps” that should have been taken at 6.40. This all leaves out of account Larkin’s view that the PPS did not follow its own procedures.

5 Enter the PSNI, stage left. The police told the PPS that Gerry Adams had “quite rightly…Aine’s welfare at the forefront throughout”. Contrast that astonishing statement with his performance under cross-examination in the first trial. Is this a genuinely held belief by the PSNI or was it another smokescreen? They lobbied the PPS for no prosecution of Gerry “in the public interest” Did it fall within example [x] in the PPS list of some grounds for not prosecuting in the public interest ” where details may be made public that could harm sources of information, international relations or national security”?

6. A number of the members of the justice committee voiced concern at the performance of the PPS. It is hard to disagree.

6. Larkin’s report was spun by the PPS as a vindication of its activities. It is no such thing.

Hair today

The Times reports that scientists from an elite FBI forensic unit exaggerated evidence that help incriminate defendants in hundreds of trials. The evidence related to hair matching and has been found to be flawed in a significant number of cases.

I seem to recall that Ronnie Flanagan had links with Quantico, the FBI Academy. I wonder how often hair match evidence was given in Northern Irish courts and was it given by experts trained by the FBI?

I note also that Chief Constable Hamilton is said by the BBC to be a member of the FBI Law Enforcement Executive Leadership Association. [whatever that is]

Let’s hope that he, the DPP and Minister Ford spring into action and review such cases here.

Christy Walsh

This man was the subject of an unfair prosecution and he had his conviction overturned, after a long battle.

He is understandably  aggrieved about that and other matters.

He has made a number of complaints and he alleges that the Establishment has ganged up against him.

It would not be the first time in recent memory that the Establishment has done this.

It will be important for the legal system, in all its guises , to show that he has received good representation and  a fair hearing at every turn. Otherwise all other campaigns by lawyers , for fair fees and for justice , are for naught.

I hope people out there are listening…..

Administrative scheme for ‘on-the-runs’

Whilst the enquiry carried out by the NI Affairs Committee has , as suggested; ‘shone a light’ into a dark corner, it cannot hope to illuminate the true horror of “the peace process”.

OTRs, letters, RPMs and secret deals combined to ensure that a huge swathe of PIRA criminals remained untouched and the City of London remained un-bombed. That imperative was sold to the masses of Northern Ireland, [softened up by placemen, selected over the years], as the “Good Friday Agreement”, what a heart tugging nomenclature. For years the state had trawled the old Poly at Jordanstown for third rate  academics whom the could put into positions of trust. They were relied on to influence their respective flocks that we should all forgive and forget. The architects of this plan in London, were clever Oxbridge types who had studied the activities of Mao, Hitler and Stalin. They have subsequently gone on to deal with Afghanistan and Libya.

The key to unlocking this puzzle is the fact that many PIRA commanders were state agents and informers for many years. Thus the state is vulnerable to legal challenge.

The idea that the state did not know of PIRA activities [participating informants] is laughable.

I , along with others, am getting there , inch by inch.

If the Westminster Executive would bend the rules in this instance, what else would they do to protect the stockbrokers?

It is interesting that the NI Attorney General felt that the judgement of Sweeney J. might be open to challenge in Europe. Of course, if Downey was another state informer, that would not be a path that the state would want to tread.

But that , given that the post Belfast agreement legal system in Northern Ireland is packed with safe pro-agreement puppets, Europe is the only option.

But I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep

Next year I will deal, point by point , with the state’s cover up of McGuinness’ role and its refusal to prosecute him, despite evidence being available. I will be pressing the state for a prosecution for the murders of my parents.

I will also be pursuing the various pieces of evidence being withheld at present.

I will also set out how the PSNI in particular failed to respond properly to my requests. I have asked the Chief Constable for an explanation of the statements of Harris and Kerr regarding Ed Moloney.

Meantime , the issue of outstanding forensic evidence remains unresolved. I am promised a reply by early January, we will see.

I may well refer all these matters to the Police Ombudsman.

I will be availing of the offer of a meeting with the Attorney General.

My campaign goes on.

“In the midst of winter I finally learned that there was within me an invincible summer” Albert Camus.