Adams defends "slab" Murphy

Trotter

Voipjunkie wrote:

Just a note Mr Murphy was running a legitimate oil distribution business from his farm
So there is nothing suspicous about oil trucks on his property or for that matter oil
There is nothing in itself suspicous about large ammounts of money most of which I believe is in third party cheques.

On the cigarettes I don't and I doubt anyone else here knows where they were found

And 2 shotguns on a farm is hardly shocking

People should wait and see if anything comes of this before jumping to conclusions and branding anyone a criminal people have the right to the presumption of innocence in this state

How about the laptop hidden in the hay bale??

Freelancer

Voipjunkie wrote:

Just a note Mr Murphy was running a legitimate oil distribution business from his farm
So there is nothing suspicous about oil trucks on his property or for that matter oil
There is nothing in itself suspicous about large ammounts of money most of which I believe is in third party cheques.

Links for the above please. First I've heard of it.

Oh I don't doubt Mr Murphy runs a "legitimate" oil company all the better to front all that washed diesal.

On the cigarettes I don't and I doubt anyone else here knows where they were found

According to the state they were found on Mr Murphy's farm.

And 2 shotguns on a farm is hardly shocking

I'll agree with that.

People should wait and see if anything comes of this before jumping to conclusions and branding anyone a criminal people have the right to the presumption of innocence in this state

Well yes but we're not a court of law and can discuss this matter, demanding we hold ourselves to the standards of a criminal investigation is a bit much. murphmurph has gone to the trouble of adding (alledgely) to many of his posts. And Mr Murphy has lost the libel action over the Sunday Times over their description of him as a "prominent IRA member", so clearly theres something going on here.

Freelancer

Trotter wrote:

How about the laptop hidden in the hay bale??

Wifi for the roosters?

Trotter

Freelancer wrote:

Wifi for the roosters?

henternet access... Sorry couldnt help it

Voipjunkie

Trotter wrote:

How about the laptop hidden in the hay bale??

Do you believe everything you read and hear as fact

I dont know if laptops were found in bales of hay but I do know that reporters tell lies all the time lets wait and see if that is a fact or a figment of a reporter or some garda's imagination

Even if it is true as far as I know there is nothing illegal in placing a laptop in a hay bale

mike65

henternet access... Sorry couldnt help it

Thats worth a ban, shirley?

Voipjunkie, your credulity knows no bounds.

Mike.

Voipjunkie

Freelancer wrote:

Links for the above please. First I've heard of it.

Oh I don't doubt Mr Murphy runs a "legitimate" oil company all the better to front all that washed diesal.



According to the state they were found on Mr Murphy's farm.



I'll agree with that.



Well yes but we're not a court of law and can discuss this matter, demanding we hold ourselves to the standards of a criminal investigation is a bit much. murphmurph has gone to the trouble of adding (alledgely) to many of his posts. And Mr Murphy has lost the libel action over the Sunday Times over their description of him as a "prominent IRA member", so clearly theres something going on here.

So your basic arguement is that the man is a Republican so even though he has never been convicted of anything he must be guilty

There is a nasty element in this country that is being led by McDowell that basically is not prepared to try and convict people of crimes with evidence but rather with rumour and innuendo and no courts.

Trotter

Voipjunkie wrote:

Do you believe everything you read and hear as fact....

.....Even if it is true as far as I know there is nothing illegal in placing a laptop in a hay bale

No I dont believe everything.. but Ive read enough books from different authors to tell me that the Slab is far from squeaky clean.

Nothing illegal about sticking a laptop in a hay bale.. true.. No point debating with ya.. Im still in shock from the craziness of that statement.

Sand

There is a nasty element in this country that is being led by McDowell that basically is not prepared to try and convict people of crimes with evidence but rather with rumour and innuendo and no courts.

(punishment) Beats the alternatives to policing offered by Slab, Adams and their colleagues. And whilst you are free to refuse to accept Milosevic did anything wrong in the Balkan Wars because he was convicted of nothing, people do reserve the right to use their common sense and the information available to them.

Freelancer

Voipjunkie wrote:

So your basic arguement is that the man is a Republican so even though he has never been convicted of anything he must be guilty

When did I say that?

No I said he failed a libel action re an accusation that he was a prominent member of the IRA, so clearly theres more going on here than your claims.

Incidently links to support your claims re the cheques?

There is a nasty element in this country that is being led by McDowell that basically is not prepared to try and convict people of crimes with evidence but rather with rumour and innuendo and no courts.

And theres a nastier element in this country that have been running a criminal empire funding themselves and a terrorist army for decades.

I'm not trying to convict someone, we're just discussing the case, it's just you cannot come with a credible defence for the man without screaming about Mc Dowell.......

Do you believe everything you read and hear as fact

Where did you read and hear your "facts" about his business. Oh thats right you've got the "good" facts we have the "bad" facts, and you're the one able to tell us which is which.

..Even if it is true as far as I know there is nothing illegal in placing a laptop in a hay bale

What was the name of the priest caught with all the timing devices all the years back? And the justification? "Well theres a perfectly innocent reason for traveling with 7-8 timing devices, I just can't think of one now."

ballooba

Freelancer wrote:

No I said he failed a libel action re an accusation that he was a prominent member of the IRA, so clearly theres more going on here than your claims.

Slightly off topic and I'm not au fait with the nuts and bolts of this particular case but, be careful about making assumptions based on the Win/Lose result of a defamation suit. Not that I am defending the Slab btw.

The outcome of a defamation suit has no bearing on the factuality of the statement concerned. Only if the truth of the statement were proved by the defence would it have any factual basis.

The defamation suit is more likely in this case to have hinged on whether "the statement would be likely to lower the opinion of the subject in the eyes of a right thinking member of society" or not.

i.e. If a right thinking member of society would already have a low opinion of the subject regardless of the factual basis of the statement. Thomas "Slab" Murphy is not a person who would be held in high regard by a right thinking member of society and hence it would be difficult to lower his standing in their opinion.

Freelancer

Ah correct however, in the case of libel (not defamation) the defence has to take on the role of the prosceution. To wit the Times has to prove Slab Murphy was a promenient member of the IRA.

I think any decent legal team of Slab's would happily to be able to prove that accusations of his membership of a terrorist organisation would lower him in the eyes of right thinking members of society.

Thomas "Slab" Murphy is not a person who would be held in high regard by a right thinking member of society and hence it would be difficult to lower his standing in their opinion.

Why was society's opinion of Slab so low before the accusation was made?

SeanW

Y'mean before he picked up the nickname "Slab?"

ballooba

Freelancer wrote:

Ah correct however, in the case of libel (not defamation) the defence has to take on the role of the prosceution. To wit the Times has to prove Slab Murphy was a promenient member of the IRA.

I would like to see evidence for the basis of this *'key difference' between libel and slander.

Link perhaps?

*alleged

Freelancer

The essential practical difference between libel and slander nowadays is that, in a slander action, the plaintiff (that is the person bringing the action) has to prove that the words caused him actual damage, financial or otherwise.

http://indigo.ie/~kwood/defamation.htm

Again like I said in a libel case the defense "the Times" had to prove Slab Murphy "was a promenient member of the IRA" I submit that any legal team worth their salt could happily prove such a claim would harm Tom Murphy's standing in society

ballooba

Not if he had a reputation for dropping concrete slabs on people's legs.

latenia

From the report of Gerry Adams' statement:


Mr Adams was critical of the scale of the huge cross-Border operation, but backed its objectives.

"We support the pursuit of criminal assets," he added.

I would hope this means that he and Martin McGuinness now surrender their 'holiday homes' in Donegal to the CAB.

ballooba

Actually haven read the Case law it would appear that the defence did prove that Slab was a membr of the IRA. Mods feel free to delete the above OT posts. it's probably more suited to the legal discussion board and it's irrelevant here.

My apologies.

Case here:
http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IESC/2000/39.html

Voipjunkie

Freelancer wrote:

When did I say that?

No I said he failed a libel action re an accusation that he was a prominent member of the IRA, so clearly theres more going on here than your claims.

And a libel action is based on the balance of probabilities not beyond all reasonable doubt


And I will just point out 2 things and they are if there was any real evidence to support any of the claims made at the libel case why was he never charged

Freelancer wrote:

Incidently links to support your claims re the cheques?

It was reported on Eammon Dunphys show this morning on Newstalk ( or may have been PK on RTE) the basic substance about the cheques was also in the Sunday times yesterday although the figures are not the same as those reported on newstalk this morning it reported 600,000 euro in cheques

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-2081945,00.html

Commonsense would suggest to me that a smuggler or someone money laundering would prefer not to be paid by cheque

Freelancer wrote:

And theres a nastier element in this country that have been running a criminal empire funding themselves and a terrorist army for decades.

I'm not trying to convict someone, we're just discussing the case, it's just you cannot come with a credible defence for the man without screaming about Mc Dowell.......

So we should throw out the basic tenets of justice to bring people down whom we have suspicions about but can prove nothing
That is a slippery slope

I am not trying to defend anyone I have no idea what Mr Murphy is/was upto but I think it is a dangerous move to throw out the court system and try people in the media

Freelancer wrote:

Where did you read and hear your "facts" about his business. Oh thats right you've got the "good" facts we have the "bad" facts, and you're the one able to tell us which is which.

Already answered that

I treat all the reported facts with the same suspicion those that make no sense I hold a big question mark over until some solid proof is offered


A lot of the reporting in this case makes no sense like if a a diesel washing operation was located on murphys land and has been operating for 20 plus years why did the authorities do nothing about it.

If Mr murphy was able to hide in a Bunker and not be detected by Gardai or the PSNI why were laptops with IRA secrets left in hay Bales and not with Mr murphy in some unfindable bunker


We keep getting these stories about IRA money and property but we never see anyone being prosecuted or even charged.

Freelancer wrote:

What was the name of the priest caught with all the timing devices all the years back? And the justification? "Well theres a perfectly innocent reason for traveling with 7-8 timing devices, I just can't think of one now."

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Freelancer

Voipjunkie wrote:

And a libel action is based on the balance of probabilities not beyond all reasonable doubt


And I will just point out 2 things and they are if there was any real evidence to support any of the claims made at the libel case why was he never charged

Because as it has been pointed out that Slab was crucial in bringing in certain IRA elements into the process, his continued criminality could not be tolerated. Certain unplatable and unagreeable people had to be released or tolerated to move the peace process forward or are you that naive?

It was reported on Eammon Dunphys show this morning on Newstalk ( or may have been PK on RTE) the basic substance about the cheques was also in the Sunday times yesterday although the figures are not the same as those reported on newstalk this morning it reported 600,000 euro in cheques

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-2081945,00.html

This from the man who told us, do you believe all you read or to that effect? :rolleyes:

Commonsense would suggest to me that a smuggler or someone money laundering would prefer not to be paid by cheque

You claim he has a legimate business, it's concievable that part of the business is money laundering. Do you have an explanation for him having nearly half a million euro in cash on his premise (as per your article) What kind of business keeps that kind of cash on the premises?

So we should throw out the basic tenets of justice to bring people down whom we have suspicions about but can prove nothing
That is a slippery slope

I am not trying to defend anyone I have no idea what Mr Murphy is/was upto but I think it is a dangerous move to throw out the court system and try people in the media

You're not trying to defend anyone but offering a litany of justification for Slabs behaviour. No one is trying Slab we're just discussing the case....

Already answered that

I treat all the reported facts with the same suspicion those that make no sense I hold a big question mark over until some solid proof is offered

You've questioned the cigerettes without offering an alternative theory you've offered plenty of theories re the cash me thinks the lady douth protest too much.

A lot of the reporting in this case makes no sense like if a a diesel washing operation was located on murphys land and has been operating for 20 plus years why did the authorities do nothing about it.

New to the peace process are we? In order to keep the peace process and make things work the authorities have had to turn a blind eye to many aspects of IRA criminality and also release murderers and killers, for the greater good. Quit with the faux high horse.

If Mr murphy was able to hide in a Bunker and not be detected by Gardai or the PSNI why were laptops with IRA secrets left in hay Bales and not with Mr murphy in some unfindable bunker

What bunker? Anyway a few minutes ago you were saying it wasn't a crime to hide a laptop in a haybale, hang on is part of your not trying to justify or defend anyone?

We keep getting these stories about IRA money and property but we never see anyone being prosecuted or even charged.

We have. And we've just found another one.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm sure someone better informed can fill you in.

Voipjunkie

Freelancer wrote:

Because as it has been pointed out that Slab was crucial in bringing in certain IRA elements into the process, his continued criminality could not be tolerated. Certain unplatable and unagreeable people had to be released or tolerated to move the peace process forward or are you that naive?

Except the allegations against Mr murphy pre date the peace process so if as is alleged Mr murphy was funding the IRA from his farm why was this not stopped before the peace process

Freelancer wrote:

This from the man who told us, do you believe all you read or to that effect? :rolleyes:

You asked for a link I gave it perhaps you could try and argue why this would not make any sense rather than dismiss it

Freelancer wrote:

You claim he has a legimate business, it's concievable that part of the business is money laundering. Do you have an explanation for him having nearly half a million euro in cash on his premise (as per your article) What kind of business keeps that kind of cash on the premises?

No the reporter on Newstalk said he had a legitimate business and that the ammount in cash was about 200,000 euro but lets wait and see what happens

Freelancer wrote:

You're not trying to defend anyone but offering a litany of justification for Slabs behaviour. No one is trying Slab we're just discussing the case....

The man has been tried and convicted already in the media and I am not justifying anything just suggesting that what is protrayed in the media may have another explanation than the sinister one prefered by you and them
I am arguing for due process which is the entitlement of everyone in this country.
And no you are not trying him you have already decided that he is Guilty

Freelancer wrote:

You've questioned the cigerettes without offering an alternative theory you've offered plenty of theories re the cash me thinks the lady douth protest too much.

Perhaps you could offer proof that the cigarettes were found on Mr murphys land and that no duty had been paid on them other than that all I can suggest is if the are belonged to him and they are illegal I presume he will be charged and we will see the facts in court

Freelancer wrote:

New to the peace process are we? In order to keep the peace process and make things work the authorities have had to turn a blind eye to many aspects of IRA criminality and also release murderers and killers, for the greater good. Quit with the faux high horse.

Except again the allegations against Mr Murphy predate the peace process so if this activity was going on at the height of the war why was it not closed down

Freelancer wrote:

What bunker? Anyway a few minutes ago you were saying it wasn't a crime to hide a laptop in a haybale, hang on is part of your not trying to justify or defend anyone?

The alleged bunker that mr Murphy hid in during the raid

And it is not a crime I merely asked if Mr murphy was able to hide undetected why were the " secret" laptops not with him

I was pointing out that side of the reports makes no sense

Freelancer wrote:

We have. And we've just found another one.

Oh what IRA people have been charged or prosecuted in relation to the Manchester raids or the Gardais Bulgarian raids or this raid

Freelancer wrote:

I'm sure someone better informed can fill you in.

You raised it I suggest you fill us in unless you are admitting you are ill informed about what you are saying on this thread

ghostdancer

TomF wrote:

I also heard in that neck of the woods that "Slab" got the nickname because he favoured the dropping of a slab of concrete onto the legs of someone who got on his wrong side. I don't know if that is a fact or not.

no, his father was nicknamed Slab, and both Tom and one of his other brothers whose name escapes me were nickanmed Slab when they were young.
apparently it originated from the Murphy's being "big slabs of men".

anyone who has read Toby Harnden's "Bandit Country" should be able to testify to that.

ghostdancer

Freelancer wrote:

http://indigo.ie/~kwood/defamation.htm

Again like I said in a libel case the defense "the Times" had to prove Slab Murphy "was a promenient member of the IRA" I submit that any legal team worth their salt could happily prove such a claim would harm Tom Murphy's standing in society

no, they had to prove the reasonable posibility of such a thing.

if they could prove his membership of PIRA to the High Court, then the Gardaí and authorities would have arrested him or at least charged him with membership based on that evidence.

Freelancer

Voipjunkie wrote:

Except the allegations against Mr murphy pre date the peace process so if as is alleged Mr murphy was funding the IRA from his farm why was this not stopped before the peace process

Links please?

You asked for a link I gave it perhaps you could try and argue why this would not make any sense rather than dismiss it

You're the man telling us "do you believe everything you read?" and then presenting a link to the times.

No the reporter on Newstalk said he had a legitimate business and that the ammount in cash was about 200,000 euro but lets wait and see what happens

And the article you linked said close to €450,000, so if you are changing that figure do let us know.

The man has been tried and convicted already in the media and I am not justifying anything just suggesting that what is protrayed in the media may have another explanation than the sinister one prefered by you and them
I am arguing for due process which is the entitlement of everyone in this country.

Really and tell me what sentence did the "media" give him? :rolleyes:

You're the one flinging out increasingly absurd justification for his actions and demanding due process, I'm not convicting him, just looking at the events honestly, screamings about "due process" on internet forum? It's a discussion forum, should we not discuss anything?

And no you are not trying him you have already decided that he is Guilty

And you're playing the Johnny Cochraine, offering increasingly outlandish defenses for his actions.

Perhaps you could offer proof that the cigarettes were found on Mr murphys land and that no duty had been paid on them other than that all I can suggest is if the are belonged to him and they are illegal I presume he will be charged and we will see the facts in court

Great we'll wait and see then.

Except again the allegations against Mr Murphy predate the peace process so if this activity was going on at the height of the war why was it not closed down

I don't know what then in your opinion is the reason for the raid?

The alleged bunker that mr Murphy hid in during the raid

And it is not a crime I merely asked if Mr murphy was able to hide undetected why were the " secret" laptops not with him

I was pointing out that side of the reports makes no sense

Mayhaps the laptop wasn't in Mr Murphy's possession and was in the possession of someone else who found they couldn't get in the bunker and instead hid the laptop, hey if you can speculate wildly why can't I?

ghostdancer wrote:

hey had to prove the reasonable posibility of such a thing.

No they actually have to prove it, I can't claim you are a kiddie fiddler and then in court just prove you may be a kiddie fiddler.

if they could prove his membership of PIRA to the High Court, then the Gardaí and authorities would have arrested him or at least charged him with membership based on that evidence.

Are you really that naive? Do you really think there aren't IRA men who the policer are aware of and haven't been charged for the greater good of the peace process?

Voipjunkie

Freelancer wrote:

Links please?

The sunday times original article about slab murphy is from 1985 which predated the peace process even if you take Hume/Adams as the beginning

Freelancer wrote:

You're the man telling us "do you believe everything you read?" and then presenting a link to the times.

So you are suggesting that the times would lie about whether the money was in cheque form or cash if so for what reason

Freelancer wrote:

And the article you linked said close to €450,000, so if you are changing that figure do let us know.

I'm not changing any figure that is the figure that was quoted on newstalk download it as a podcast and listen

Freelancer wrote:

Really and tell me what sentence did the "media" give him? :rolleyes:


You're the one flinging out increasingly absurd justification for his actions and demanding due process, I'm not convicting him, just looking at the events honestly, screamings about "due process" on internet forum? It's a discussion forum, should we not discuss anything?

I have not offered any justification for anything merely pointed oout that there are alternative explanations than the ones offered in the media and readily accepted as fact by yourself

Freelancer wrote:

And you're playing the Johnny Cochraine, offering increasingly outlandish defenses for his actions.

What is outlandish dont just say I have offered outlandish defenses if they are outlandish then show this

Freelancer wrote:

I don't know what then in your opinion is the reason for the raid?

I don't know what was the reason for the raid on stormont

Freelancer wrote:

Mayhaps the laptop wasn't in Mr Murphy's possession and was in the possession of someone else who found they couldn't get in the bunker and instead hid the laptop, hey if you can speculate wildly why can't I?

That is a reasonable explanation except they found more than one laptop
why are people walking around haybarns with laptops with IRA secrets or is it not quite possible that these laptops are used in the legitimate business operated by Murphy and contain no "secrets" [/QUOTE]

Freelancer wrote:

No they actually have to prove it, I can't claim you are a kiddie fiddler and then in court just prove you may be a kiddie fiddler.

No they had to prove it on the balance of probabilities which is no where near the level of prove needed for a criminal conviction

Freelancer

Voipjunkie wrote:

The sunday times original article about slab murphy is from 1985 which predated the peace process even if you take Hume/Adams as the beginning

I don't know, perhaps Slab was seen as a moderate voice in the IRA and they wanted to keep him around?

So you are suggesting that the times would lie about whether the money was in cheque form or cash if so for what reason

Where on earth did I suggest that?

You claimed the figure was around €200,000 in cash, the times article you quoted says "€450,000 in sterling and euro notes", you're the one making a quarter of a million euro vanish.

I'm not changing any figure that is the figure that was quoted on newstalk download it as a podcast and listen

Yet the article you quoted disputes this new figure you've come up with.

I have not offered any justification for anything merely pointed oout that there are alternative explanations than the ones offered in the media and readily accepted as fact by yourself

No you're gone out of your way to offer excuses and justification and then when challenged on this gone "hey just playing devils adovcate" Look have the decency to admit your position, or at least try to see both sides.

What is outlandish dont just say I have offered outlandish defenses if they are outlandish then show this

Show what? You've claimed theres nothing wrong with hiding a laptop in a hay bale, and sure the cigarettes are his and then tried to downplay the amount of cash on the premise........

I don't know what was the reason for the raid on stormont

What non sequiter?

That is a reasonable explanation except they found more than one laptop
why are people walking around haybarns with laptops with IRA secrets or is it not quite possible that these laptops are used in the legitimate business operated by Murphy and contain no "secrets"

Why hide it in a hay bale then?

No they had to prove it on the balance of probabilities which is no where near the level of prove needed for a criminal conviction

So you admit that there is some evidence Slab was in the IRA not enough to make a criminal conviction but enough to be able to say it in print?

murphaph

I believe the Slab had to leave his breakfast on the table so he obviously didn't have time to retrieve the laptop.

The man is as bent as a 9 bob note and even those trying their best to defend him know that deep down, he's a criminal and is closely tied to their hero, Mr. Adams.

ghostdancer

Freelancer wrote:

No they actually have to prove it, I can't claim you are a kiddie fiddler and then in court just prove you may be a kiddie fiddler.



Are you really that naive? Do you really think there aren't IRA men who the policer are aware of and haven't been charged for the greater good of the peace process?

no, they had to prove that there was a reasonable chance of it being true.

i'm well aware that there are people that the police are aware of that haven't been charged, mainly due to the fact that they usually can't be connected to anything. if the Times had ANYTHING concrete on slab murphy with relation to him being head of the army council, the gardai would have pressed it, he's as important to the Peace Process now as he was then.

Freelancer

ghostdancer wrote:

no, you have to prove that there's a reasonable chance of it being true.

So essentially the times has to have some evidence or present a case. So there's a case aganist him.

i'm well aware that there are people that the police oare aware of that haven't been charged, mainly due to the fact that they usually can't be connected to anything.

Yeah there are lots of people who haven't done anything, who er haven't been charged er with anything.

if the Times had ANYTHING on slab murphy, the gardai would have pressed it, he's as important to the Peace Process now as he was then.

The above is pure speculation, you don't know what the Gardai would do. And since the IRA are 'no more and commited to democratic process' how is Slab still important to the peace process?

Voipjunkie

murphaph wrote:

I believe the Slab had to leave his breakfast on the table so he obviously didn't have time to retrieve the laptop.

The man is as bent as a 9 bob note and even those trying their best to defend him know that deep down, he's a criminal and is closely tied to their hero, Mr. Adams.

You see I don't care if Mr murphy did everything that he is alleged to have done or not that is not the point it is for a court of law to decide whether he is a criminal based on the evidence put before it is not upto elements in the media along with elements in the Gardai to decide who is guilty. There is so much stuff printed as fact about Murphy that it is arguable that he could not receive a fair trial in this state.
Over the last 20 years an insidious element has taken hold in sections of our media that prosecutes and finds people guilty on rumour and hear say this is not how to operate a criminal justice system.
I don't care whether it is
Slab Murphy ,Wayne O'donoghue , Joe O'reilly ,Ian Bailey , The husband of Grace livingstone or Siobhan Kearney , Frank Connolly and on and on.

Trial by media is wrong and the media and the Gardai get it wrong that is why we went to the bother of setting up a justice system.

Take for example Ian Bailey who the media assured us was responsible for the murder of Ms Du plantier except now it seems that the main witness was coaxed and harrassed into making a statement and has withdrawn her statement.
Mr Bailey it should be noted also failed in a libel case.

Anyone who read Jimmy Guerins book would be left with grave doubts as to whether Grace livingstons husband could have could have been responsible for her death.

What is going on with the Rachel O' Reilly murder at the moment is a disgrace particularly rags like the Evening Herald who seem to come up with a new angle everyday or every slow news day.


Just to add that people should not allow political persuasion to come into this I understand that some people have a deep distrust if not hatred for provisional Republicanism but people should not put our justice system to one side because the person accused is a political opponent to do that inevitably leads to miscarriages of justice. We should have a basic principle that people are innocent untill proven guilty whether they are provisional republicans, Loyalists, FFers or normal Joe soaps with no political affiliation.
We are on a slippery slope and our current Minister for Justice has not helped matters infact he has made it worse.
The contrast between the hullabaloo over the Garda leak over his sons assault and the stony silence over the leak a day nature of the Rachel O'Reilly murder investigation is striking.

I dont believe that we should censor our media but I honestly think that it is only a matter of time before someone gets off with murder because they could not secure a fair trial due to media coverage.