Tag Archives: Disclosures Tribunal report

From top: Lucia and Jim O’Farrell hold a picture of their late son, Shane; Fianna Fáil TD John McGuinness

Yesterday evening.

In the Dáil.

Further statements were made in respect of Judge Peter Charleton’s recent report on the Disclosures Tribunal which found that Sgt Maurice McCabe was the victim of a campaign of calumny carried out by former Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan and former Garda Press Officer Supt Dave Taylor.

Fianna Fáil TD John McGuinness (above) told the Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan that the Government’s apology to Sgt Maurice McCabe “the most blatant, brazen piece of hypocrisy I have seen in a long time”.

At the tribunal, Mr McGuinness told Judge Charleton that when he was the chairman of Public Accounts Committee on January 23, 2014, the then Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan told Mr McGuinness that Sgt McCabe “fiddles with kids”.

He said Mr Callinan also referred to both Sgt McCabe and former Garda John Wilson as “fucking headbangers”.

And he told the judge that, the following day, during a meeting in a car park of Bewley’s Hotel on the Naas Road, Dublin, on Friday, January 24, 2014, Mr Callinan told Mr McGuinness that Sgt McCabe sexually abused his children and nieces.

Judge Charleton accepted Mr McGuinness’s evidence.

Further to this…

In his statement about the tribunal’s report, Mr McGuinness told Minister Flanagan…

“First, I compliment Mr Justice Charleton on the efficient way in which he dealt with the tribunal and on the clear report he submitted afterwards. He was unambiguous in his comments on the various issues raised. He has shown the Government and the State how a tribunal can be run efficiently and over a short time.

“I also acknowledge Sergeant Maurice McCabe’s role in the tribunal and its outcome. I am satisfied that the tribunal heard his version of events, and the tribunal was clear in its acknowledgement that he was vindicated in everything he did and said.

“As for the Government and the apology to Sergeant McCabe, it was the most blatant, brazen piece of hypocrisy I have seen in a long time. Sergeant McCabe was telling his story for 12 years, describing what was happening and highlighting issues in the force, yet the Government stood idly by and did nothing.

“In fact, the time for the apology and intervention was when the current Taoiseach, Deputy Varadkar, said as a Minister that Maurice McCabe’s actions were distinguished, not disgusting.

“However, the Government sat on its hands and watched as that family was put through torture during those years.

The Minister for Justice and Equality continues to preside over a Department that appears to be dysfunctional. I have seen no evidence of the reform that was promised. There are many examples of that, such as the current hearings of the Committee of Public Accounts with prison officers, including Noel McGree.

To say that the replies to all the questions I have asked in this House were economical with the truth and misleading in their content is an understatement.

“The Department feels it is okay to stand over that. Now that the Minister has been converted to examining the actions of the Department and is showing a willingness to say when he is wrong, will he tell John Wilson, Noel McGree and the two female whistleblowers I am aware of that he was wrong?

“Will he intervene now and tell them he is sorry for what the State has done to them? Will he give them a chance to get their lives back on track, as he should? I doubt it, because he does not have the backbone to do it. That is the sorry aspect of what is happening.

“The tribunal came and went and left its report behind. The Minister appears to think that the dogs will bark and the caravans will move on. However, the country has taken a turn.

There is a demand now for truth and justice from all of us who serve, but the people are not getting truth and justice from the Department; they are getting anything but that.

“The Government has to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to court or through tribunals before it will acknowledge what is happening to individuals in the employment of the State. I have given the Minister the examples and I have asked him to intervene. Perhaps he will tell us what he intends to do about it.

A motion was passed by the House relating to the investigation of the death of Shane O’Farrell. The Government has taken no action to implement the desire of the Opposition to have that matter investigated.

It lets Shane’s mother, Lucia, his father and sisters wallow in the sorrow of losing him and will not intervene. The Government fails to understand the devastation it has visited on their lives by not recognising them.

“Ultimately, the motion was passed in the House but nothing was done about it. If the confidence and supply arrangement meant anything it should make a difference in people’s lives. Under that arrangement Fianna Fáil should step up to the plate and tell the Government to act on the motion or else.

“That is what we are coming to because the State and the Government are presiding over the beating up of our citizens by Departments.

“Similar to the actions of Sergeant Maurice McCabe, other State employees have come forward and given disclosures. To say they have been treated badly is, again, an understatement. Their lives have been ruined. In some cases they are professionals and their careers have been ruined.

There are other cases, such as Douglas Fannin and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The Department has not dealt with it. It just continues to ignore it and to pull people through the courts.

“Last week, the Department of Defence went to the High Court. The Department was totally wrong and had given incorrect and inaccurate replies to parliamentary questions.

“In the Morrissey v State case the Department of Defence lost. Thankfully that young man is now taking his place in the Cadet School.

“I have just highlighted a few cases but I shall also speak about one other case where, again, the House set up an investigation and to this day we do not know what is happening.

I refer to the Grace case. Individuals who were mentally and physically challenged and non-verbal were abused while in the care of the State. The State is sitting on its hands rather than dealing efficiently and factually with the cases of Grace and the 47 other individuals.

“What more do we have to do in this House in the context of debating the issues, of highlighting the issues and of getting action from a Government that quite frankly does not seem to care?

The only reason the Minister apologised is because he was flushed out and the matter came out into the open. The State could not beat Maurice McCabe but there are many others out there who the Government seems prepared to beat.

The Government is currently dealing with the case of John Barrett. I wonder why that is coming about and what is going to happen.

“When individual citizens raise issues in this State, the Government’s answer is to bring the house down around the person, to push him or her to the pin of the collar and to break careers, families and health. There is no response from the Government and no showing of humanity or compassion.

“There is no attempt to bring in the necessary reforms to stop all of this from happening again and again. People turn to this House for direction and leadership. They turn to this House for protection. They believe they are doing the right thing.

If one was to ask Maurice McCabe I would say he is doubtful whether he would do it all over again. He has, however, done an enormous service to the State and he is to be commended on what he did. He should be protected for what he did. The others should also be protected for what they did.

“I have given the names to the Minister, and I have often mentioned them in public. Out of all of those cases and from the motion that was passed, I believe the Shane O’Farrell case is one that clearly demonstrates to people that the State and the Government have no interest unless they are pushed to the point where action has to happen. By that point, the families are generally broken.

“The Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and his Government, have an awful lot to answer for. The political system in this House has an awful lot to answer for. The confidence and supply arrangement has a lot to answer for because it does not demand transparency and accountability.

“Where it sees the need for accountability, such as the motion on the Shane O’Farrell case, it is not prepared to do anything else. That is just an exercise in voicing an opinion about things rather than an exercise to put in place fair play, justice and an acknowledgment that the State should not beat up families or ignore them.

“The State should do the opposite; it should show compassion, humanity and an attempt to deal with the reality of the lives of the people who are being destroyed by the inaction of the State.”

Transcript via Oireachtas.ie

Previously: ‘We Are Part Of A Cover-Up’

‘Delay, Deny, Lie Then Cover-Up’

From top: Crime journalist Paul Williams (centre), of the Irish Independent, and Det Supt John O’Reilly attending the Disclosures Tribunal last Summer

Further to the release of the Disclosures Tribunal report yesterday,

Justice Peter Charleton took time in his report to concentrate on the work of journalist Paul Williams, of the Irish Independent.

Mr Williams wrote several articles about Ms D and her 2006 “dry humping” allegation against Sgt Maurice McCabe in April and May 2014 – after interviewing Ms D in March 2014.

The central focus of the series of articles was Ms D’s unhappiness with the Garda investigation into her 2006 complaint, which was carried out by Supt Noel Cunningham.

In 2007, the DPP ruled that there was no basis for any prosecution in regards to Ms D’s complaint and Judge Charleton, having read Supt Cunningham’s investigation report, repeatedly told the tribunal that his investigation was “a model of efficiency and fairness”.

Mr Williams didn’t name Sgt McCabe or Ms D but many witnesses at the tribunal said they knew the articles were about Sgt McCabe.

Sgt McCabe himself told the tribunal he knew they were about him and received phone calls from people relaying the same.

The provenance of Mr Williams’ articles came about via Det Supt John O’Reilly, a friend of Mr Williams, who was the conduit for contact between Mr D and Mr Williams.

Det Supt O’Reilly knew Mr Williams through work as Mr Williams, Judge Charleton noted, “had spent a considerable time under police protection”.

Det Supt O’Reilly was a family friend of the D family for many years.

The tribunal heard differing evidence from Mr D and Det Supt O’Reilly as to who suggested to whom that Ms D talk to Mr Williams – after Irish Mail on Sunday journalist Debbie McCann and Irish Sun journalist Eavan Murray had called to the D house – but the judge found:

“The tribunal does not accept that any idea about talking to the media or any idea as to a suitable person within the media came from anyone other than Mr D.”

Det Supt O’Reilly told the tribunal in evidence that he subsequently believed that his setting up of contact between Mr Williams and Mr D was “unwise”.

But Judge Charleton went further, finding:

“It did no service to anyone. It caused further and completely unjustified pain to Maurice McCabe and to his family. The right advice from Detective Superintendent O’Reilly would have been to leave matters that belong in the past to the past; that is even supposing that some event had occurred.

“It should be remembered that he was a policeman. Why did Detective Superintendent O’Reilly not support the integrity and thoroughness of his honest police inquiries? Why did he imagine that there could be anything wrong with the investigation?

“Given that a thorough investigation had been undertaken, and that over fifteen years had passed since the time of the alleged event, nothing positive could have come out of this. Nothing positive did come of it.”

Paul Williams eventually interviewed Ms D on March 8, 2014.

The tribunal accepted Mr Williams’ evidence that when he met Ms D in March 2014, he had not heard about the false rape allegation which had been erroneously created back in August 2013 and was, in March 2014, sitting in a cabinet file in TUSLA.

He only knew what Ms D told him which was the original 2006 allegation.

Mr Williams’ first article published on April 12, 2014, headlined “Girl wants new probe into alleged sex assault by Garda” detailed Ms D’s dissatisfaction with the 2006/2007 investigation, as she saw it.

Judge Charleton criticised Mr Williams for not including input or seeking any response from either Sgt McCabe or Supt Noel Cunningham, who investigated the 2006 complaint, for the article.

Judge Charleton found:

“Given the widespread nature of the rumours, it was clear to people who knew about the allegation that it referred to Maurice McCabe and alleged a poor investigation. Certainly, almost everyone who actually read these articles, whether in journalism or police work, put two and two together. There would also have been a not insignificant number of them in Garda Headquarters.”

On April 15, 2014, Ms Williams published a second article about Ms D.

Headlined “Alleged Garda sex victim wants to meet Martin”, it was about how Ms D wanted to meet Fianna Fáil leader Micheal Martin.

After this article, Mr Williams facilitated this meeting between Ms D and Mr Martin.

On April 16, 2014, his third artlcle headlined “FF leader to meet woman at centre of claims she was abused by Garda” was published.

And on April 30, 2014, Mr Williams collected Ms D from a train station and drove her to the Dáil where she met Mr Martin.

On May 3, 2014, a fourth article appeared headlined “Kenny to set up probe into Garda sex abuse claims”.

Mr Williams said this was based on him getting confirmation from Mr Martin’s office that a letter in relation to his meeting with Ms D had been passed on to the office of An Taoiseach.

Judge Charleton found:

“While it had been, this did not mean that An Taoiseach was proposing to do anything about it and so the article could, be described as speculative.”

And, again, Judge Charleton stated Mr Williams should have contacted either Sgt McCabe or those who were involved in the investigation of Ms D’s complaint in 2006/2007, saying:

“They would have constituted unwelcome attention in the shape of a clear identification of Maurice McCabe by those who were aware of the Ms D matter and the return of an allegation long since dealt with.”

Although Mr Williams did not make contact with either Sgt McCabe or Supt Cunningham before writing his series of articles, Mr Williams did speak with the then Garda press officer Supt Dave Taylor.

There was conflicting evidence given to the tribunal about their interaction.

Supt Taylor told the tribunal that Mr Williams, in March 2014, rang him up and said “guess where I am?” before telling Supt Taylor he was at the D household, that Sgt McCabe had ruined Ms D’s life and that he was going to write a damaging article about Sgt McCabe.

Supt Taylor claimed he passed this information on to then Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan and then Deputy Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan.

Mr Williams had denied this when he gave evidence and said he had asked Supt Taylor a set of questions about the Ms D case and was told by Supt Taylor that “the investigation had taken place, a file has been sent to the DPP and there were no charges”.

Judge Charleton accepted Mr Williams’ evidence and rejected that of Supt Taylor, saying:

There would not be the slightest reason for Paul Williams to curry some kind of favour with the Garda Press Office by gleefully announcing the news that bad news was imminent for Maurice McCabe. That does not fit with the evidence, or with the character, of Paul Williams.”

Ms D made a complaint about the investigation into her 2006/2007 allegation to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission on April 29, 2014 – days before, unbeknownst to Ms D, the false rape allegation which was sitting in a cabinet file in TUSLA was randomly plucked out and circulated to An Garda Síochána and eventually presented as a true allegation to the then Garda Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan.

It remained in Garda HQ until February 2017.

The tribunal heard that the idea of making a complaint to GSOC was something Ms D had discussed with Mr Williams during their interview in March 2014.

But, Judge Charleton found “he [Williams] did not in any way or at all lead her into making this further complaint”.

Mr Williams was one of the 12 journalists whom Supt Taylor claimed he “negatively briefed” against Sgt McCabe.

As mentioned above, Judge Charleton accepted Mr Williams evidence – that Supt Taylor told him that a complaint had been made, a file went to the DPP and there were no charges – but did not find that Supt Taylor “negatively briefed” Mr Williams.

Judge Charleton found:

“While Superintendent Taylor claims, in typically laconic form used in relation to any evidence that might have supported his claims, that he briefed Paul Williams negatively against Maurice McCabe, no details of this, as usual, were supplied and the tribunal does not believe him.”

Meanwhile…

Dublin City University professor Colum Kenny

On March 2, 2014 – just over a month before Mr Williams’ first article on Ms D and days before Mr Williams first met Ms D – journalist and Dublin City University professor Colum Kenny wrote an article in the Sunday Independent about Sgt McCabe and how he had been wrongly blamed for the disappearance of a seized computer central to a sex abuse case.

In the article, he made the following reference to the Ms D allegation:

“It is understood that Sgt McCabe has also been subjected to a serious accusation by a senior garda that was subsequently referred by gardai to the DPP, who found no basis on which to pursue the matter.”

When Mr Kenny gave evidence to the tribunal, he indicated that when sending the March 2 article for publication to the Sunday Independent, he had sent a document to INM’s lawyers outlining the DPP’s full directions against Sgt McCabe in order to verify what he was writing.

The tribunal didn’t specifically hear what this document was or specifically to whom it was sent or even specifically when it was sent.

Mr Kenny wasn’t asked these details.

Judge Charleton made no comment on this document in his report.

The report can be read in full here

Yesterday: Legal Coffee Drinker: Charleton Report – Conclusions

Justice Charleton On...

Previously: Maurice McCabe And INM: Part 1

Maurice McCabe And INM: Part 2

I Told INM Maurice Was Innocent

Rollingnews