RUC claim `likely an exaggeration'

a television journalist said in the London High Court he felt a claim made on a programme he produced that a third of the RUC…

a television journalist said in the London High Court he felt a claim made on a programme he produced that a third of the RUC were members of a group in collusion with loyalist terrorists was likely an exaggeration.

The allegation of an "inner force" of 4,000 members within the RUC was made by a then unidentified witness, later named as Mr James Sands, in a Channel 4 programme on October 2nd, 1991, which alleged collusion between the security forces and loyalist terrorists.

The producer, Mr Sean McPhilemy, is suing the Sunday Times for libel, following an article in May 1993 which alleged the programme was a hoax. The newspaper is standing by its claim and pleads justification.

Yesterday, Mr Andrew Caldecott QC, for the Sunday Times, said Mr Sands in his filmed interview said one-third of the RUC were in the "inner force", a group in collusion with loyalist terrorists. This would mean about 4,000 members. Mr McPhilemy said: "In my view it was likely an exaggeration." It was a staggering claim.

READ MORE

Mr Caldecott quoted from a statement Mr McPhilemy made to a court hearing in which he said that Mr Sands' claim of 4,000 RUC members being involved affected his attitude towards making the programme.

Mr McPhilemy said Mr Sands retracted his allegations later when he was arrested by the RUC. Mr Sands said it was all a hoax and he did it for money. Mr Sands claimed then that he had been put up to it by a Sunday World journalist, Mr Martin O'Hagan, who had introduced Mr Sands to the programme. It was also suggested that he had obtained the information from press cuttings and articles kept in Mr O'Hagan's shed.

Mr McPhilemy said the allegation was "laughable" that Mr Sands' interview emanated from press cuttings and a briefing given in the shed. Information in the programme had not been published before.

Counsel then turned to Mr Sands' motive for giving the interview. He said as Mr McPhilemy understood it, Mr Sands thought Ulster should know that an organisation was there fighting in opposition to the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

However, Mr Sands was concerned about his own safety but gave the names of alleged members.

The hearing continues.