Lack of basic crime reconstruction a ‘serious omission’, say former gardaí

Former officers say a reconstruction would have demonstrated the sheer logistical improbability of such a complex crime operation being based on information supplied at a moment’s notice

Judge Peter Smithwick arriving at the tribunal. Three former senior Garda officers say the finding of Garda collusion  damages relations between the Garda and PSNI and undermines the State’s ability to actively pursue substantial acts of collusion during the Troubles.

Judge Peter Smithwick arriving at the tribunal. Three former senior Garda officers say the finding of Garda collusion damages relations between the Garda and PSNI and undermines the State’s ability to actively pursue substantial acts of collusion during the Troubles.

Tue, Jan 28, 2014, 06:00

The failure of the Smithwick Tribunal to undertake a basic reconstruction of the murders of the two RUC officers it investigated meant it missed a vital opportunity to see how unlikely its own findings were, three former senior Garda officers have concluded in an evaluation.

They say the finding of Garda collusion in the killings damages relations between the Garda and PSNI and undermines the State’s ability to actively pursue substantial acts of collusion during the Troubles.

They believe the main finding, arrived at by a poorly run tribunal, is based on no evidence and impugns the good name of unidentified gardaí not represented at the tribunal who were offered no opportunity to defend their good names.

The former chief superintendents are John O’Brien, Michael Finnegan and Michael Staunton.

Chief Supt Harry Breen and Supt Bob Buchanan were shot dead by the Provisional IRA shortly after leaving a meeting at Dundalk Garda station in March 1989 at an ambush point in south Armagh.

Based on their experience of investigating the Provisional IRA (PIRA) and evidence given to the tribunal by the killers, the three former Garda officers believe the murder plan could not have been executed without significant risk had it started from scratch on the morning of the killings and been facilitated entirely on the basis of specific information supplied by a Garda member in Dundalk, as the tribunal found.

“Logistically this required 20-70 operatives, involving provision of weapons, scouting, communication between PIRA members, contingency planning, escape route [and] counter-forensics”, it said of the tribunal’s preferred scenario.

“The tribunal did not have a crime reconstruction undertaken to determine the logistical probabilities. This was a serious omission on their part.”

The men have concluded that the tribunal simply preferred to believe untested information claiming Garda collusion supplied in private by the PSNI and ignored the evidence of PIRA members involved in the murders, despite the latter having no reason to lie.

They suggest the tribunal made no finding of collusion against the three former Garda sergeant suspects – Leo Colton, Finbar Hickey and Owen Corrigan – for lack of evidence but then decided not to extend that standard to their colleagues in Dundalk on the day, instead making the “quantum leap” to find an unknown number among them guilty of collusion.

“We have searched for the logic and the reasoning behind this finding and obviously it should have two manifestations: legal and factual,” the men write in their analysis.

“In legal terms the assumption is that it is on the ‘balance of probabilities’. However, the balance of probabilities makes sense provided there are individual facts, which collectively allows one to make a global conclusion. There are no such individual facts.”

They point out too that there was no record of the tribunal investigating an allegation that RUC officers were passing information to the Provisional IRA.

The men have submitted their evaluation to the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter, and it is understood it will also be sent to Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan. They say they are hopeful of “inviting analysis from impartial observers” who they hope will consider whether they accept the tribunal’s finding or the critique provided by them.

We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.

News - direct to your inbox

Which Daily Digest would you like?

Irish Times News