One OF the 1970 Arms Trial defendants has called for the Attorney General to be sacked after what he claims is a flawed and misleading report on allegations of evidence tampering in the case.
Capt James Kelly yesterday disputed the statement in the report on the case by the AG, Mr Michael McDowell, that "there is no evidence to suggest that . . . it would be possible to arrive at a definitive conclusion about the existence or non-existence of an attempt to suppress evidence." Mr McDowell published his report on Thursday.
According to Capt Kelly, Mr McDowell's report confirmed that the statement of the late head of Army Intelligence, Col Michael Hefferon, had been edited to leave out sections that undermined the prosecution.
"The fact is that Col Hefferon's statement exculpating me was `edited' or `doctored' by elements of the prosecution team, and that a forged statement of Col Hefferon's evidence was presented to the courts in the book of evidence," he said.
He disputes Mr McDowell's stated belief that the original Hefferon statement was available to the courts.
He challenges Mr McDowell's statement that there was "no close correspondence between the alleged Berry markings and the subsequent changes to the Col Hefferon statement". The term "alleged" is misleading, he says, "as even a cursory comparative examination shows the markings to be in Mr Berry's handwriting, a fact confirmed to me by his daughter. Further, the four main statements by Col Hefferon exculpating me were marked by Mr Berry with vertical lines in the margin and in the case of two with the notation `NB'.
"The four statements were (a) `I told Mr Gibbons at this time about Capt Kelly's involvement with the Defence Committees in the North regarding the procuring of arms and ammunition for their defence.' (b) `I told him (Gibbons) that Capt Kelly intended travelling to the Continent again in connection with the arms deal.' (c) `Mr Gibbons was prepared to take the necessary steps to have him (Kelly) relieved of (regimental) duty in order that he could travel to the Continent.' (d) `It is my opinion that Mr Gibbons knew that Capt Kelly was involved in assisting the Defence Committees in the North to procure arms.'
He says Mr McDowell cast doubt on the validity of the notguilty verdict in the Arms Trial by querying whether the arms whose importation had been attempted were for the use of the Defence Forces.
"If they were not", said Capt Kelly, "Mr Gibbons was acting outside his remit as the statutory authority for the purchase of arms by the Defence Forces. If he was doing so, why was he not arrested and charged with conspiracy, instead of being retained in cabinet and promoted?"