Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Should another Garda Commissioner resign?
Comments
-
Who does the buck stop with? Didn't she say she was going to change the toxic culture of the guards during her tenure? What did she actually do, to effect change in that regard? Still seems to be completely full of rotten apples and practices at the top.
Do you think she did a good job? Does anyone?
It appears that this Templemore issue was known about in the Gardai for over a decade - Commissioner Murphy knew about it in 2008. According to the Irish Times timeline, O'Sullivan was informed of it in July 2016, and in the midst of a whole heap of other issues (including whistleblowers etc.), she still managed to get the issue addressed by the Internal Audit Unit and informed the Department and the Minister by the following March. The audit took a year but that was needed before anything could be done.
I mean, how quick do you want a complicated issue dealt with, giving due process to everyone involved, and unravelling a decades old culture?0 -
It appears that this Templemore issue was known about in the Gardai for over a decade - Commissioner Murphy knew about it in 2008. According to the Irish Times timeline, O'Sullivan was informed of it in July 2016
Thats not the case- OSullivan knew of dodgy accounting practices in the Garda College in 2008 when she worked there as Assistant Commissioner in charge of human resources for the college. She would have known about this from the McGee report which she later tried to supress from civilian members of AGS who were trying to get to the bottom of the mess.
She was fully aware of the ironically named Laundry account whereby senior members of AGS in Templemore effectively stole money from trainee Gardai (who were already on a low wage) for laundry expenses when the State was already covering these costs. Money from the Laundry account was then used for all sorts of things for senior Gardai to splash cash on themselves. The Head of Audit is on record as saying there exists hundreds of cheque stubs from Garda College accounts where senior Gardai were writing cheques to themselves-Labour TD Alan Kelly asks Head of Internal Audit Niall Kelly if has he ever come across any cheques made out to senior gardaí by the gardaí themselves. Mr Kelly said he did, he came across “hundreds” of them and there could be payments of thousands.
Noirin even goes on to say at PAC-As Accounting Officer, I take my statutory responsibility for how An Garda Síochána spends taxpayer’s money very seriously. It is vital that it be spent efficiently and effectively and in the best interests of the people, the State and An Garda Síochána
So why then did she not inform the Comptroller & Auditor General about millions in taxpayers money unaccounted for? As accounting officer she is obliged to do this under the 2005 Act yet she didnt do it for a whole 10 months despite her own Head of Audit and Head of HR informing her of her legal obligations? Why is it the Head of HR had to take to writing solicitors letters as he believe he was being set up under OSullivans watch? Is it because he was uncovering millions of taxpayers money being misspent by former colleagues of Noirins in Templemore?
Here is what Head of HR John Barrest had to say about the scandal which went on under watchThe open and essential question is how the annual returns made to the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Finance, signed by the Accounting Officer [Garda Commissioner] over all the years since the 2005 Act, made no reference to millions of euro held in these unauthorised accounts (private banking, brokerage accounts, retail banking and credit unions) at a time when large supplementary estimates were routinely requested from Government.”
It goes on and on and the person who had responsibility for the accounts in Templemore was OSullivan herself. Despite her knowing well millions of taxpayers money was held in unauthorised accounts every year she signed those accounts as being a true and accurate refection and every year she became part of a cover up of large scale fraud. Fraud by senior members of the Gardai in Templemore, all of who she must have known personally from her several years working there herself. Kinda convenient that she would break the law by signing off on dodgy accounts that her colleagues were benefitting from, isnt it?
Also I note we still dont have an arrest of the retired Garda who shifted taxpayers money into his own personal account in AIB Cabra, quelle surprise :rolleyes:
So blanch152 you can keep your delusion going that Noirin was "largely blameless" but facts are facts and ultimately even Noirin herself recognised that she was to blame and she resigned as a result.0 -
Muahahaha wrote:So blanch152 you can keep your delusion going that Noirin was "largely blameless" but facts are facts and ultimately even Noirin herself recognised that she was to blame and she resigned as a result.
I find it incredible that even when offered evidence to the contrary someone will persist in defending the indefensible.0 -
Thats not the case- OSullivan knew of dodgy accounting practices in the Garda College in 2008 when she worked there as Assistant Commissioner in charge of human resources for the college. She would have known about this from the McGee report which she later tried to supress from civilian members of AGS who were trying to get to the bottom of the mess.
She was fully aware of the ironically named Laundry account whereby senior members of AGS in Templemore effectively stole money from trainee Gardai (who were already on a low wage) for laundry expenses when the State was already covering these costs. Money from the Laundry account was then used for all sorts of things for senior Gardai to splash cash on themselves. The Head of Audit is on record as saying there exists hundreds of cheque stubs from Garda College accounts where senior Gardai were writing cheques to themselves-
Noirin even goes on to say at PAC-
So why then did she not inform the Comptroller & Auditor General about millions in taxpayers money unaccounted for? As accounting officer she is obliged to do this under the 2005 Act yet she didnt do it for a whole 10 months despite her own Head of Audit and Head of HR informing her of her legal obligations? Why is it the Head of HR had to take to writing solicitors letters as he believe he was being set up under OSullivans watch? Is it because he was uncovering millions of taxpayers money being misspent by former colleagues of Noirins in Templemore?
Here is what Head of HR John Barrest had to say about the scandal which went on under watch
It goes on and on and the person who had responsibility for the accounts in Templemore was OSullivan herself. Despite her knowing well millions of taxpayers money was held in unauthorised accounts every year she signed those accounts as being a true and accurate refection and every year she became part of a cover up of large scale fraud. Fraud by senior members of the Gardai in Templemore, all of who she must have known personally from her several years working there herself. Kinda convenient that she would break the law by signing off on dodgy accounts that her colleagues were benefitting from, isnt it?
Also I note we still dont have an arrest of the retired Garda who shifted taxpayers money into his own personal account in AIB Cabra, quelle surprise :rolleyes:
So blanch152 you can keep your delusion going that Noirin was "largely blameless" but facts are facts and ultimately even Noirin herself recognised that she was to blame and she resigned as a result.
You are once again mixing allegations with fact, as you did with Garda Harrison, as you did with Superintendent Taylor and as you did about O'Sullivan's son.
You were wrong nearly all of the time on those and I would have thought you would have learned to tone it down by now on the hyperbolic accusations.0 -
Hitman3000 wrote:I find it incredible that even when offered evidence to the contrary someone will persist in defending the indefensible.
It's all part of the modus operandi of the 'Nothing to see here' brigade which is all too common on this thread. Sure according to blanch152 McCabe has "serious questions to answer" and Noirin oSullivan is "largely blameless". It's like trying to convince someone that black is white.0 -
Advertisement
-
Muahahaha wrote:It's all part of the modus operandi of the 'Nothing to see here' brigade which is all too common on this thread. Sure according to blanch152 McCabe has "serious questions to answer" and Noirin oSullivan is "largely blameless". It's like trying to convince someone that black is white.
In fairness there is only one still 'beating that drum'.0 -
Who does the buck stop with? Didn't she say she was going to change the toxic culture of the guards during her tenure? What did she actually do, to effect change in that regard? Still seems to be completely full of rotten apples and practices at the top.
Do you think she did a good job? Does anyone?
She said lots of flowery things in public but in private her actions were often the quite opposite. Its been well documented now that in public she was praising Maurice McCabe but in private she was instructing her barristers to attack his credibility at the OHiggins Commission. Even when her barristers went back to her in the middle of the hearing and asked her was she sure that attacking McCabes credibility was the instruction she was giving she replied that was her instructions and to go ahead and do it.
On her supposed reform of AGS she promised the Minister for Justice, the Policing Authority, the Garda Inspectorate and the general public that a program of reform was under way and that she was setting out to transform the Gardai.The program of reform was branded as "Transformation" and a media launch and PR fanfare were ordered. But it completely fell flat on its face because the person who OSullivan appointed to lead this Transformation program (Chief Super Aiden Glacken) stood up on the podium at the launch to give his big speech and said:I am 34 years in the guards, and I see no problem with the culture of the organisation
I mean there is the head of reform basically saying on day one of his job to reform AGS that he sees no need for reform. All under the watch of Noirin OSullivan who actually appointed him, you literally could not make this stuff up.0 -
You are once again mixing allegations with fact, as you did with Garda Harrison, as you did with Superintendent Taylor and as you did about O'Sullivan's son.
You were wrong nearly all of the time on those and I would have thought you would have learned to tone it down by now on the hyperbolic accusations.
Wow, what a way to completely side step the entire post. I guess when you have no coherent arguments these are the tactics employed. Along with your whataboutery, insinuations and slurs on McCabes character. Its just par for the course for you, you come on here and throw out some "nothing to see here" and then when challenged with facts and quotes and transcripts of what actually went on your default position is to attack the poster and ignore the argument.
Again I challenged you yesterday to back up your assertation that I said everything Harrison & Taylor said was the truth. I told you that you wouldnt be able to do that and it turns out I was right. Because we both know I never posted any such utterance and we both know for the umpteenth time on this thread you are wrong, very wrong.
If you cant even offer a defence (that doesnt resort to whataboutery) as to why you beleive Noirin OSullivan is "largely blameless" despite the stack of evidence contained in my last several posts I really dont know why you are bothering to post here.0 -
Wow, what a way to completely side step the entire post. I guess when you have no coherent arguments these are the tactics employed. Along with your whataboutery, insinuations and slurs on McCabes character. Its just par for the course for you, you come on here and throw out some "nothing to see here" and then when challenged with facts and quotes and transcripts of what actually went on your default position is to attack the poster and ignore the argument.
Again I challenged you yesterday to back up your assertation that I said everything Harrison & Taylor said was the truth. I told you that you wouldnt be able to do that and it turns out I was right. Because we both know I never posted any such utterance and we both know for the umpteenth time on this thread you are wrong, very wrong.
If you cant even offer a defence (that doesnt resort to whataboutery) as to why you beleive Noirin OSullivan is "largely blameless" despite the stack of evidence contained in my last several posts I really dont know why you are bothering to post here.
If you are going to ask me to defend something I posted, please have the courtesy to accurately reflect what I said.
In saying that O'Sullivan was largely blameless in a post from weeks ago, I was clearly talking about the evidence before the Tribunal. Still, there doesn't seem to have been any smoking gun about her knowledge of the McCabe smears. You are now introducing a whole heap of other unconnected issues to confuse the point and trying to attach a previous post of mine to this issue.0 -
Legal challenge to the new garda commissioner, he should never have been appointed in the first place. A shocking inept decision.
High Court challenge launched to prevent Drew Harris becoming next Garda Commissioner http://jrnl.ie/41878250 -
Advertisement
-
Floppybits wrote: »Legal challenge to the new garda commissioner, he should never have been appointed in the first place. A shocking inept decision.
High Court challenge launched to prevent Drew Harris becoming next Garda Commissioner http://jrnl.ie/4187825
If this bit is true his appointment is not only insensitive it is completely untenable.He claims Harris has signed and is bound by the UK’s Official Secrets Act making it impossible to fully discharge his duties as the next Garda Commissioner.0 -
Not alone should he not be GC, but the muppets that appointed him should be given the boot also. Cluster **** of a decision.0
-
I said it at the time - bad appointment.
They rushed into it.0 -
Tis a strange one alright. Surely Harris being bound by the UK Official Secrets Act means he has a conflict of interest in serving as Commissioner? No doubt we will be hearing about his own personal Chinese Wall in the High Court case but it does seem to be an insurmountable conflict to have a legal duty to two State security forces simultaneously.0
-
tayto lover wrote: »I said it at the time - bad appointment.
They rushed into it.
I believe they had 16 applications for the position of Commissioner. They certainly seemed to have gone with the most controversial one. As I said on here before if he has skeletons in his closet then some of his former RUC colleagues are going to out him when he is in situ. If that happens then the so called party of law and order will have Garda Commissioner Scandal No.3 on their hands.0 -
Tis a strange one alright. Surely Harris being bound by the UK Official Secrets Act means he has a conflict of interest in serving as Commissioner? No doubt we will be hearing about his own personal Chinese Wall in the High Court case but it does seem to be an insurmountable conflict to have a legal duty to two State security forces simultaneously.
Explain the conflict of interest angle to me, please.
As I understand it, the UK Official Secrets Act doesn't allow him to reveal any secret knowledge or confidential information gained during his time working for the PSNI. How does that prevent him working for the Gardai? No internal candidate would have access to that knowledge either, so what is the problem?
It won't stop him dealing with the information if it comes to him via Garda sources.
Do you believe he should be a quasi-spy reporting on PSNI secrets?
As for the court case, it hasn't a hope in hell of succeeding.0 -
Explain the conflict of interest angle to me, please.
As I understand it, the UK Official Secrets Act doesn't allow him to reveal any secret knowledge or confidential information gained during his time working for the PSNI. How does that prevent him working for the Gardai? No internal candidate would have access to that knowledge either, so what is the problem?
It won't stop him dealing with the information if it comes to him via Garda sources.
Do you believe he should be a quasi-spy reporting on PSNI secrets?
As for the court case, it hasn't a hope in hell of succeeding.
The Dublin Monaghan bombing is still an open case. That is just one case where there is a conflict and he is immediately compromised.0 -
It won't stop him dealing with the information if it comes to him via Garda sources.
Do you believe he should be a quasi-spy reporting on PSNI secrets?
Hmmm, so if Drew Harris (as Garda commissioner) was privy to a piece of vital information about, say, the Dublin Monaghan bombings and that same piece of information was subsequently relayed to him by Garda sources, it would be ok for him not to have told the government before he was made aware of the Garda source?0 -
Explain the conflict of interest angle to me, please.
As I understand it, the UK Official Secrets Act doesn't allow him to reveal any secret knowledge or confidential information gained during his time working for the PSNI. How does that prevent him working for the Gardai?
If he were an Australian or American police officer the conflict of interest angle wouldnt be so pertinent. But he is not, he is former RUC so his history is important here. It is not hard to imagine any number of scenarios where he is compromised, for example the Dublin Monaghan bombings are still unsolved and there are allegations of collusion with the RUC to make them happen. What if the Gardai arrested suspects for the bombings in the morning? How would that sit with Harris and his knowledge of the bombings from the RUC side? Who would he be serving, the RUC or the Gardai? What knowledge does Harris have about the main suspects and will he be releasing this to investigators in the Gardai? The questions go on and on.
Im not claiming any of the above will happen. Im just making the point that it is not difficult to see that he does indeed have a conflict of interest in any number of historical cross border crimes. He was MI5s main contact in the RUC so I would say he most certainly has information in his head that would be useful to the Gardai in certain investigations. Problem is the UK Official Secrets Act forbids him from revealing it. That is a conflict of interest when there are criminals out there that the Gardai are trying to bring to justice.
The Policing Authority should have thought of this IMO. They had 15 other candidates to choose from but they certainly choose the most controversial.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Hmmm, so if Drew Harris (as Garda commissioner) was privy to a piece of vital information about, say, the Dublin Monaghan bombings and that same piece of information was subsequently relayed to him by Garda sources, it would be ok for him not to have told the government before he was made aware of the Garda source?
Essentially, yes. This is standard practice across all types of industry, that while you can bring your expertise to your new role, you can't bring proprietary knowledge.0 -
Advertisement
-
Essentially, yes. This is standard practice across all types of industry, that while you can bring your expertise to your new role, you can't bring proprietary knowledge.
You can't compare policing and state security to industry though. It's in a totally unique and special category of career. "Proprietary knowledge" in this case potentially means "knowledge of crimes for which justice has never been served". That's a serious issue.0 -
If he were an Australian or American police officer the conflict of interest angle wouldnt be so pertinent. But he is not, he is former RUC so his history is important here. It is not hard to imagine any number of scenarios where he is compromised, for example the Dublin Monaghan bombings are still unsolved and there are allegations of collusion with the RUC to make them happen. What if the Gardai arrested suspects for the bombings in the morning? How would that sit with Harris and his knowledge of the bombings from the RUC side? Who would he be serving, the RUC or the Gardai? What knowledge does Harris have about the main suspects and will he be releasing this to investigators in the Gardai? The questions go on and on.
Im not claiming any of the above will happen. Im just making the point that it is not difficult to see that he does indeed have a conflict of interest in any number of historical cross border crimes. He was MI5s main contact in the RUC so I would say he most certainly has information in his head that would be useful to the Gardai in certain investigations. Problem is the UK Official Secrets Act forbids him from revealing it. That is a conflict of interest when there are criminals out there that the Gardai are trying to bring to justice.
The Policing Authority should have thought of this IMO. They had 15 other candidates to choose from but they certainly choose the most controversial.
Conflicts of interest happen all the time, most of the time they are only minor.
So, in order to demonstrate a conflict of interest, you would first have to believe in British collusion, then in his knowledge of that collusion, and finally that they form a large part of his work. To succeed in a court case, you would have to prove all of that.
Whatever about the first two tests, and I agree to differ with anyone on those, the "historical cross border crimes" are a tiny proportion of his work. To put it another way, given that the number of unsolved IRA crimes are much higher, if Drew Harris is unable to be the Garda Commissioner because of a conflict of interest, then there isn't a SF politician who could be Minister for Justice for the same reason.0 -
-
Do you believe he should be a quasi-spy reporting on PSNI secrets?
Personally I regard anyone who is privy to secrets which detail human rights violations by their employer, and chooses not to blow the whistle on it when given a good opportunity to so, as a vile individual. "PSNI secrets" in this case is synonymous with "evidence of unpunished crimes, which should be made known to the police with the intention to arrest, charge, and prosecute those responsible".
How anyone can justify cover ups is totally beyond me. If you're in a position in which you have knowledge that your employer has violated human rights or engaged in serious violent crime, and you choose not to report it to the proper authorities when given reasonable opportunity to do so, in my view you're just a vile human being in general.
EDIT: Just to point out that I am in no way discriminatory in this attitude. I apply it as much to Irish non-whistleblowers as British ones. Any senior Garda who knew about any of the scandals which have unfolded in recent times and chose not to reveal it either to the media or to GSOC is also a vile human being as far as I'm concerned. Having evidence of abuses by your agency and choosing to sit on it is inherently immoral and disgusting.0 -
Conflicts of interest happen all the time, most of the time they are only minor.
A conflict of interest is a conflict of interest, there are no degrees here. Best practice and good governance says you should avoid them at all costs but the Policing Authority and their appointment of Harris has done the exact opposite. They cant not have known this when discussing his appointment.
And in respect of his conflict on the Dublin Monagan bombings- there is nothing minor about it. 33 Irish citizens lost their lives that day and another 300 were injured. The Gardai have never brought anyone to justice for this crime. I think it is beyond any doubt that Harris has knowledge of this atrocity from the RUC side which is fair enough, he was a senior RUC officer and the main MI5 point of contact.It was his job, not holding that against him. But it is an entirely different kettle of fish when he is in the pay of the Irish State in his role as Garda Commissioner and he has valuable information in his head that is highly relevant to a Garda investigation on the killing of Irish citizens.So, in order to demonstrate a conflict of interest, you would first have to believe in British collusion, then in his knowledge of that collusion, and finally that they form a large part of his work. To succeed in a court case, you would have to prove all of that.
Whatever about the first two tests, and I agree to differ with anyone on those, the "historical cross border crimes" are a tiny proportion of his work.
Are you saying that the RUC never colluded with loyalist terrorists? I mean you would have to be pretty naive or obtuse to even think that at this stage. And if Harris didnt know about it then it would make him pretty incompetent.0 -
To put it another way, given that the number of unsolved IRA crimes are much higher, if Drew Harris is unable to be the Garda Commissioner because of a conflict of interest, then there isn't a SF politician who could be Minister for Justice for the same reason.
The important difference here being Drew Harris is in line to be GC, while no SF deputy is currently (or may ever be) in line to be MfJ. Pedantic but important bridge across the Rubicon.0 -
The important difference here being Drew Harris is in line to be GC, while no SF deputy is currently (or may ever be) in line to be MfJ. Pedantic but important bridge across the Rubicon.
He wants to put an ex senior RUC officer on the same levels as a Sinn Fein politician because of unsolved IRA actions.
It's a nonsense and the usual attempt at mischief making.0 -
Did Harris not tell the Smitwicks Tribunal that he had information that a Garda in Dundalk informed the IRA of the movements of the two murdered policemen and then refuse to name him?
If so then he is not a credible person to head the Garda imo.
Furthermore he will not have the trust of the Garda rank and file who don't believe his account at the tribunal.0 -
tayto lover wrote: »Did Harris not tell the Smitwicks Tribunal that he had information that a Garda in Dundalk informed the IRA of the movements of the two murdered policemen and then refuse to name him?
Yes, he refused to name the Garda he was accusing of colluding with the IRA. His evidence at the Smithwick Tribunal was described as "nonsense on stilts". Because of him refusing to name the suspect all Gardai in Dundalk came under suspicion of collusion with the IRA. Senior Gardai in the Crime & Security branch in the Park were less than impressed with Harris over his Tribunal evidence and now he has to work over many of the same people.
Also Drew Harris has been picking a fight for years with an organisation called Relatives for Justice who campaign for justice for both sides of the community in Northern Ireland. Under his watch he refused to release historical RUC files at dozens of coroners inquests. Harris was in charge of the PSNI Historical Enquiries Team which was set up on London orders to investigate collusion between the RUC and loyalist paramilitaries including the Glenanne Gang, UVF and UDA.The Historical Enquiries Team led by Harris was set up in 2005. By 2010 they still had not produced any kind of report. In 2010 the Belfast High Court ruled that the PSNI frustration of justice for the relatives was "an abuse of power" and that "the unfairness here is extreme". Relatives for Justice have not had any joy in seeing RUC files that relate to their case and the matter has now been referred to the European Court of Human Rights. This is despite the fact at the launch of the PSNI Historical Enquiries Team under Harris that they "pledged to carry out its investigations in a way that commanded the confidence of the whole community". Well that clearly turned out to be complete spin.
Then to make matters worse Harris addressed the Northern Ireland Retired Police Officers Association, basically the old RUC boys club. So on one hand his PSNI Historical Team is supposed to be investigating crimes by the RUC and on the other he is addressing a group of ex-RUC reassuring them that they wont be facing any investigations. This information is only known because a Coroners Court judge ordered that the minutes of the meeting between Harris and his deputy and the ex-RUC men be released into the public domain. As part of the minutes Harris deputy got up on stage and said "the PSNI is determined to play our part in the defence of the RUC". Then Harris got up on stage and said "We dont disassociate ourselves with what happened in the past. I have great pride in my RUC service".
So basically in public Harris was supposed to be leading the PSNI Historical Enquiries Team into RUC crimes and then in private he was reassuring ex-RUC officers that the investigation would go no-where. Which is basically what happened as Relatives for Justice have been frustrated by Harris at every step of the way.0 -
Advertisement
-
Far too many skeletons in his cupboard.Yes, he refused to name the Garda he was accusing of colluding with the IRA. His evidence at the Smithwick Tribunal was described as "nonsense on stilts". Because of him refusing to name the suspect all Gardai in Dundalk came under suspicion of collusion with the IRA. Senior Gardai in the Crime & Security branch in the Park were less than impressed with Harris over his Tribunal evidence and now he has to work over many of the same people.
Also Drew Harris has been picking a fight for years with an organisation called Relatives for Justice who campaign for justice for both sides of the community in Northern Ireland. Under his watch he refused to release historical RUC files at dozens of coroners inquests. Harris was in charge of the PSNI Historical Enquiries Team which was set up on London orders to investigate collusion between the RUC and loyalist paramilitaries including the Glenanne Gang, UVF and UDA.The Historical Enquiries Team led by Harris was set up in 2005. By 2010 they still had not produced any kind of report. In 2010 the Belfast High Court ruled that the PSNI frustration of justice for the relatives was "an abuse of power" and that "the unfairness here is extreme". Relatives for Justice have not had any joy in seeing RUC files that relate to their case and the matter has now been referred to the European Court of Human Rights. This is despite the fact at the launch of the PSNI Historical Enquiries Team under Harris that they "pledged to carry out its investigations in a way that commanded the confidence of the whole community". Well that clearly turned out to be complete spin.
Then to make matters worse Harris addressed the Northern Ireland Retired Police Officers Association, basically the old RUC boys club. So on one hand his PSNI Historical Team is supposed to be investigating crimes by the RUC and on the other he is addressing a group of ex-RUC reassuring them that they wont be facing any investigations. This information is only known because a Coroners Court judge ordered that the minutes of the meeting between Harris and his deputy and the ex-RUC men be released into the public domain. As part of the minutes Harris deputy got up on stage and said "the PSNI is determined to play our part in the defence of the RUC". Then Harris got up on stage and said "We dont disassociate ourselves with what happened in the past. I have great pride in my RUC service".
So basically in public Harris was supposed to be leading the PSNI Historical Enquiries Team into RUC crimes and then in private he was reassuring ex-RUC officers that the investigation would go no-where. Which is basically what happened as Relatives for Justice have been frustrated by Harris at every step of the way.
Should never have been considered for the job.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement