A JUDGE yesterday awarded damages after finding in favour of Sinn Fein Councillor Christy Burke who had claimed that a Special Branch detective deliberately set him up to pressurise him into becoming an IRA informer.
Judge Esmond Smyth also held that former Det Sgt Michael Hughes had acted under the cloak of the Garda Siochana's authority, leaving the State vicariously responsible for his actions and for damages.
He awarded Mr Burke £7,500 damages and costs and also ordered that the State pay the costs bill incurred by Sgt Hughes. He granted a stay on all orders pending consideration of an appeal to the High Court.
Mr Burke had sued Sgt Hughes, retired, and the State in the Circuit Civil Court for £30,000 damages for fear and distress.
He claimed his anxiety had been caused by a deliberate and reckless warning from Sgt Hughes of a plot by British intelligence, with a splinter group of the Provisional IRA, to murder him.
He told the court he believed Sgt Burke had attempted to set him up as an informer who would pass on information to him in return for having been tipped off about the threat to his life.
Judge Smyth held yesterday that the warning was bogus. Sgt Hughes had known Mr Burke was apprehensive in November 1992 about his safety and that of his family and, for health reasons, that he was particularly vulnerable to pressure.
Sgt Hughes had wanted information about IRA activities and felt such evidence might be forthcoming were he to cultivate Mr Burke as an informer by telling him of a threat to his life.
Asking why such an experienced and apparently committed garda had taken these steps to get information, Judge Smyth recalled that in evidence from his superiors it had been stated Sgt Hughes had been considered to be under pressure and stress at the time and that his intelligence reports had not been as reliable as before.
"The fact that his conduct was out of character with his previous record does not excuse it," Judge Smyth said. "I surmise there may have been considerable pressure - to get results and as much information as possible about the activities of serious criminals and a serious threat from terrorism which this unit has to confront every day."
Judge Smyth said there had been nothing to suggest the gardai were other than highly professional in their pursuit of this task and followed proper procedures at all times. Sgt Hughes had taken an inexcusable short cut in the pursuit of that objective.
Judge Smyth rejected as "bizarre" a claim by Sgt Hughes that Mr Burke had been shot in the back through a door in an earlier assassination attempt and that the door had been replaced by a carpenter sympathetic to the IRA in a cover up.
He said there had been nothing in Mr Burke's medical records to suggest he had suffered any such injury. It was spurious to suggest that Sgt Hughes had been unable to put details of the alleged assassination attempt to Mr Burke because he had not reported it to the Garda.
"There probably never was such an attack on Mr Burke in the first place and I do not accept he had evidence of any such attack," Judge Smyth said. "The only reason for this report was to bolster up his already questionable allegation of the threat to Mr Burke's life."
Judge Smyth said Sgt Hughes had denied he had told Mr Burke he was under threat from British intelligence but he was satisfied the version of events given by Mr Burke was more probably correct.
He recalled evidence by a superior of Sgt Hughes who said he was aware Sgt Hughes had wanted to cultivate Mr Burke as an agent while he was under pressure. He felt this explained why Sgt Hughes emphasised he had done Mr Burke a favour when he had asked him to supply information on the London bombings. He had felt Mr Burke might return the favour to him.
"I think he was using the threat as a means of putting pressure on a person he believed to be vulnerable at the time," Judge Smyth said. "His real reason was to recruit an informant. The threat, which I am satisfied was unreal, was to be the means to that end."
Judge Smyth said Mr Frank Clarke SC, for the Garda authorities, had on behalf of his clients denied responsibility for Sgt, Hughes's actions and contended he had acted outside the scope of his authority. Mr Peter Charleton SC, for Mr Burke, had submitted the State was vicariously liable.
"It is clear Sgt Hughes had no actual authority for making the threat," Judge Smyth said. But it is clear that when he did, he did so as a serving member of the guards during the course of his working hours. He had visited Mr Burke's home in that capacity and had been recognised by the plaintiff as a senior figure in the Special Branch."
Judge Smyth said it was part of the duties of the Special Detective Unit to seek out people who could provide help and information about criminal and terrorist activities. When Sgt Hughes had passed on the report about the threat on Mr Burke's life, albeit a false one, it was the sort of information intended to cultivate the return of information.
"I think what Sgt Hughes did was done under the cloak of authority as a member of the SDU and that accordingly, even though what he did was an unauthorised way of doing his job, the authorities are vicariously responsible for his actions on that day," Judge Smyth said.
In assessing damages at £7,500 Judge Smyth said he felt Mr Burke had exaggerated to some extent.
Judge Smyth granted Mr Robert Barron, junior counsel for Mr Burke, an application for costs against the State. He granted Mr Brian O'Moore, counsel for former Sgt Hughes, his client's costs against the State, and granted Mr John O'Donnell, junior counsel for the State, a stay on all of his orders to facilitate consideration of an appeal to the High Court.
. After the judgment Mr Burke said he was happy justice had been done and his account had been vindicated in the court. He was delighted the judge had seen the shot in the back story by Sgt Hughes, for what it was "sheer fantasy".
"I would, if necessary, have stripped to the waist in the judge's chambers just to prove the falsity of that allegation," Mr Burke said.