Retired garda seeks interview notes

SMITHWICK TRIBUNAL: A BARRISTER representing a retired garda before the tribunal has said the allegations the hearing was examining…

SMITHWICK TRIBUNAL:A BARRISTER representing a retired garda before the tribunal has said the allegations the hearing was examining were more grave than the issues before previous tribunals of inquiry here.

Jim O’Callaghan SC, for retired detective sergeant Owen Corrigan, was speaking during a legal application to have access to notes of an interview between the tribunal and retired assistant garda commissioner Pat O’Toole, who gave evidence on Friday, February 10th.

The tribunal is looking at allegations a Garda leak led to the IRA ambush in which two RUC officers, Chief Supt Harry Breen and Supt Bob Buchanan, were killed as they returned from a meeting in Dundalk Garda station.

Mr O’Toole was challenged about evidence regarding an internal Garda inquiry following the deadly ambush.

READ MORE

He told the tribunal collusion allegations were part of the reason for the inquiry headed by assistant commissioner Edward O’Dea, but in evidence on Friday, he said the terms of reference were simply to establish the circumstances of the visit by the two RUC men to Dundalk.

Mr O’Callaghan has described allegations of collusion as a “monstrous lie”. He argued he was entitled to the interview notes, as evidence there were no concerns about collusion in 1989, crucial evidence reflecting on his client’s good name.

The barrister said that because the interview with Mr O’Toole was “deployed” by the tribunal in questioning all the witnesses, all parties were entitled to copies.

Otherwise there was a danger parts of the document could be “cherry-picked.”

Lawyers for two other retired sergeants, Leo Colton and Finbarr Hickey, supported the application by Mr O’Callaghan. Both men also deny any allegations of collusion.

Counsel for the Garda Commissioner also supported the submission.

Tribunal barrister Justin Dillon SC said no allegation of wrongdoing had been made by Mr O’Toole.

Since no one’s reputation had been impugned, there was no need to hand over confidential tribunal notes.

In reply, Mr O’Callaghan said it was for counsel to decide how material might be used in cross-examination, not for the tribunal.

“Simply because Mr O’Toole is not an accuser of Mr Corrigan does not mean I am not entitled to cross-examine him,” the barrister said. He said any confidentiality belonged to Mr O’Toole, not the tribunal, and Mr O’Toole had not claimed confidentiality.

Diarmaid McGuinness SC, for the Garda Commissioner, said tribunal barrister Mr Dillon was attempting a “Harry Potter three-part trick”, and “put the cloak of invisibility back” on the notes, which he had referred to during his questioning of Mr O’Toole.

Mark Robinson, on behalf of the PSNI, said he would support the position taken by Mr Dillon. The issues raised in the Re Haughey and O’Callaghan v Mahon tribunal cases did not arise in this case, he said.

Once “the smoke cleared”, it was clear Mr O’Toole had not made allegations, and the tribunal had simply taken him through statements he had made in order to clarify his evidence.

The chairman said he would give his decision on the applications today.