A Co Louth man told the High Court yesterday his good name was "totally destroyed" by comments made by his estranged wife's lawyers during her trial for stabbing him in the back.
Mr Patrick Rogers, of Legion Avenue, Dundalk, said statements made about him during the trial were completely untrue. He claimed he had no opportunity to challenge them, and nobody was examined about the truth of the allegations, which were reported in the media. As a result, his good name had been totally destroyed in Dundalk.
He told Mr Justice Finnegan the allegations had also affected his children and that he and they were still getting abuse some 31/2 years after the court hearing.
Mr Rogers is seeking a transcript of the trial of his wife, Ms Rose Rogers, who pleaded guilty to occasioning her husband actual bodily harm in June 1997. She received a nine-month suspended sentence at Dundalk Circuit Court in June 1998.
During a two-day hearing Mr Justice Finnegan has heard arguments concerning the correctness of the decision of the Information Commissioner to allow Mr Rogers access to the transcript of his wife's trial and to statements, including one made by Ms Rogers. Judgment was reserved.
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Mr O'Donoghue, has asked the court to discharge the decision of the Information Commissioner. The Minister's lawyers are claiming the production of the documents sought by Mr Rogers is prohibited by law.
The Department claimed the stenographer's note was a record of court proceedings, held by the courts within the meaning of Section 46, and argued that its release was prohibited.
In support of its argument, the Department also said the President of the High Court had ruled in October 1994 that transcripts of evidence in criminal cases were prepared for one purpose only, to enable the Court of Criminal Appeal to decide appeals from convicted persons.
The Commissioner found the Freedom of Information Act did apply to a record held by the courts where the record related to proceedings in court held in public; where the record was not created by the court; and where disclosure of the record to the general public was not prohibited by the court.
The Commissioner said it seemed to him that the emphasis in all the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Irish Times and Others v Murphy and Others on the right of the public to be given an accurate account of court proceedings was at odds with the idea of a blanket ban on the provision of transcripts of trials which had concluded. The transcript was a record of what took place in open court.
In an affidavit, Ms Eimear Fisher, a Department of Justice official, said the stenographer was at all times acting as agent of the court, and the material presented on behalf of the Minister to the Commissioner established the existence of a relevant prohibition.