THE SENTENCING in Waterford on Monday of a serving Garda sergeant and two former gardaí represented the first time in the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission’s six years that Garda members it brought to trial were convicted and imprisoned.
The case arose from an incident involving Waterford man Anthony Holness, who was on his way home from a night out in the city in January 2010 when he stopped to urinate in a doorway and then resisted arrest.
Former garda Daniel Hickey (29) was seen on CCTV striking Mr Holness on the head after he had been pepper-sprayed, before kicking him on the head as he lay on the ground. He was convicted of assault causing harm and sentenced to three years, with 18 months suspended.
Det Sgt Martha McEnery (42) was seen slapping Mr Holness on the back of the head. She was convicted of assault and given a four-month suspended sentence.
Former garda John Burke (39) was manning the Garda CCTV room in Waterford on the night and turned the camera away from the incident. He was convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice and was jailed for two years, with 12 months suspended.
Garda members who spoke to The Irish Times in the aftermath of the case condemned the actions of those involved.
However, six years on from the establishment of the independent body to investigate complaints against gardaí, members offered a mixed view of the agency’s impact on the force.
Some describe the commission as a necessary evil; there to weed out the small numbers of rogue members, while exonerating innocent gardaí wrongly accused.
Others speak of an organisation they believe is trying to “catch out” members for “minor or honest mistakes” such as rudeness to members of the public.
“There was a lot of talk at the start of it that guards would be afraid to tackle people or to draw their batons when trying to control violent people but I don’t think that has happened; members are in no way ruled by fear on that,” said one member.
Another is less convinced: “I think in all jobs you have the people who will keep their heads down . . . And I think in the guards they can use their worries about being investigated by the commission nearly as an excuse to be lazy; to do as little as possible especially when dealing with public order.”
Other gardaí said an effort by the agency four years ago to halt an inquest into the deaths of two men shot dead by officers at a post office raid in Lusk, Co Dublin, because it might prejudice any criminal investigation, was arrogant and ill-judged.
Some sources said it suggested the gardaí were guilty of using excessive force in the shootings.
“I think it did a lot of damage to the relationship between the guards and the commission,” said one senior Garda source.
However, another said the commission conducted a lengthy investigation that cleared the armed detective involved of using excessive force. And the same source said it had similarly cleared gardaí at Store Street Garda station of any wrongdoing in Terence Wheelock’s death – a 20-year-old Dubliner who died three months after falling unconscious in a cell at the station in June 2005.
Another agreed the agency had done some “service” to individual officers wrongly accused, but still believed the commission was often pedantic in its inquiries or in sending minor matters back to the Garda for internal investigation.
“It’s that fear that for an honest error you will be tarred; your record is then blackened. You’re supposed to keep people, victims, informed about a case and you don’t keep up to speed with the paperwork and then they complain.”
One senior officer said of the commission: “They send back to the gardaí an awful lot of complaints to investigate ourselves. This generates monumental levels of paperwork and it definitely holds me back from doing my job as the person running the district.”
Other sources believed the commission’s ability to arrest gardaí for failing to answer certain questions during interviews effectively robs officers of the right to silence enjoyed by everyone else in society.
One source believed it was unfair that a garda could face a criminal trial on a charge after a commission inquiry and then be cleared at that trial only to face an internal disciplinary tribunal on the same matter.
A spokesman for the commission said it was bound by law to investigate complaints that if proven true would be a breach of Garda discipline or the criminal law. He denied the agency was pedantic, saying what appeared to be more minor allegations could not be ignored. The spokesman said the commission had long acknowledged that applying for an adjournment to the inquest of the men shot dead in Lusk was “unfortunate” and had arisen from a bureaucratic error.
On the issue of overly burdening more senior members of the force with the task of investigating Garda complaints, the commission said it deemed many cases inadmissible for investigation.