IN his closing speech to the jury yesterday afternoon, Mr James Price QC, counsel for the Sunday, Times, said Mr Albert Reynolds had given "false evidence" during his seven days in the witness box and dismissed his explanations as "rubbish."
He accused the former Taoiseach of being a "reckless gambler" who had lied on oath over the circumstances of his downfall.
Mr Price said he would outline "the truth" of the events leading to the collapse of the Reynolds government, and why he and his Fianna Fail colleagues had deliberately misled the Dail.
"I will show you that Mr Reynolds's evidence on this was false," he said.
Recalling that Mr Reynolds's explanation for the downfall of his government was "confusion, error and shambles," Mr Price told the jury that, yet again, the former Taoiseach's excuse was wrong.
"At every point the excuses offered by Mr Reynolds are false. The whole history of the events we've been looking at shows that Mr Reynolds and his government were desperately striving to save themselves. That is the truth of the matter," he said.
Mr Price asked the jury to consider what sort of man they believed Mr Reynolds to be while they assessed the evidence.
"Is he a careful, truthful, scrupulous man? Is he a man like Mr Fitzsimons, for example, or is he a gambler?
"Is there a streak of recklessness in Mr Reynolds? Is he a man with little regard indeed for whether the Dail has been given all of the available information?" he asked.
After reminding the jury of the beef tribunal and the Masri passport affair - described by Mr Price as "two episodes which shed light" on Mr Reynolds's character - he continued: "Does Mr Reynolds take responsibility for what he does?
"Or does he blame others, the Eoghan Fitzsimonses of this world? Honest men, distinguished men, going about their jobs in difficult circumstances."
Mr Price told the jury that after Mr Reynolds realised that his speech on November 15th to the Dail had not satisfied the Labour Party's demand for a full explanation of the delays in the extradition of a paedophile priest, Brendan Smyth, his main concern was to "save his skin."
Recalling that Mr Reynolds had testified that he had received the letter from the then attorney general, Mr Eoghan Fitzsimons, outlining the Duggan case at 9 p.m. - after his speech Mr Price told the jury that it was "frankly rubbish" for Mr Reynolds to conclude that the ease meant Mr Whelehan could now be "thrown to the wolves" because he had misled the government.
Instead, Mr Reynolds realised that only Mr Whelehan's resignation could save the government, Mr Price said. Quoting from the contemporaneous notes of the then social welfare minister, Dr Michael Woods, Mr Price suggested to the jury that they clearly revealed Mr Reynolds's state of mind after reading Mr Fitzsimons's letter.
"His close colleague writes down, while Mr Reynolds is speaking, `Harry is the only one that could save the government'
That is the truth of what Mr Reynolds's state of mind is at 1O p.m. that night, Tuesday.
"He had not concluded that Mr Whelehan had misled the government, the Dail and the public and would have to go.
The problem was, Mr Price claimed, that Mr Reynolds's speech did not fulfil the Labour Party's requirements and Mr Whelehan was refusing to resign as president of the High Court because he maintained, correctly, that the Duggan case was irrelevant.
"They [Fianna Fail ministers] were trawling for a justification to throw Harry to the wolves, which they had to do in order to save their own skins.
"What was the pin or the hook? It was Mr Fitzsimons's letter.
"There was nothing else. Mr Fitzsimons's letter had to be presented as telling something new, telling them that Mr Whelehan's explanation was wrong," he said.
Recalling Mr Reynolds's testimony that he "hauled" Mr Fitzsimons out of his bed, at 1:30 a.m. to explain his letter, just hours before delivering the speech on November 16th to the Dail, Mr Price said that as a "vastly experienced" politician and businessman Mr Reynolds would have fully understood the letter.
Instead, Mr Price told the jury, "the truth of that night" was that Mr Fitzsimons was "persuaded" to draft a few lines far the speech stating that Mr Whelehan should resign over a technical mistake in order to save the government.
"Was there any justification for Mr Reynolds to drive a stake through Harry's heart on the Wednesday? No, everybody accepts that now, including Mr Reynolds, that there was no need," he said.
Mr Price reminded the jury that the Irish media had also accused Mr Reynolds of deliberately misleading the Dail, thereby proving that his assertion that he always sued any newspaper which attacked his integrity was untrue.
"He will not sue, unless he is pretty sure that he can get home without too much trouble," he added.
Turning to the Sunday Times article, Mr Price told the jury that Mr Alan Ruddock, who wrote the allegedly libelous story, had got "as close to the truth as anyone could on the basis of the information available at the time" and had not acted maliciously.
Mr Price asked the jury to consider upon what basis Mr Reynolds could claim that Mr Ruddock had acted "dishonestly" when he had the same view as the majority of Irish journalists.
Mr Price also stated it was "unfair and wrong" to condemn Mr Ruddock for failing to contact the former Taoiseach before he wrote the article.
"That is absurd. On Mr Reynolds's own evidence, he was so traumatised he couldn't even read a newspaper, let alone talk to them," he said.
The hearing was adjourned until today when Mr Price will conclude his speech to be followed by Lord Williams QC, counsel for Mr Reynolds.