Account of Court Proceedings 12/09/07 Belmullet

mayo | environment | news report Thursday September 13, 2007 21:57 by Man at the back of the courtroom

Gardai took up approximately half of the available seats in the Belmullet courtroom Wednesday, leaving others to stand around at the edges. Things had barely begun when Judge Devins caught sight of a man with a large camera standing at the back. He was brought to the front and reprimanded before the judge turned her attention to the Gardai "if this was the four-courts people would have been searched, in eight years I've never seen this before" – the proceedings were halted and everyone was ordered out to be searched.

A couple of slightly embarrassed Gardai searched some of the bemused bystanders thoroughly checking even that their phones were switched off whilst others walked through with unchecked bags, it was a case of too little too late. On the day the Gardai in court bore more of a resemblance to naughty school kids at the back of a bus than police officers. Chewing gum, giggling and whispering over each other's shoulders it startled me that these people were representatives of the state. I would've thought they could hold more decorum when someone's freedom is at stake.

The court reconvened and the case of John Monaghan accused of assault at the McGrath's pier incident in June of this year (where police drove a digger into a crowd of peaceful protesters) was put off until October. A number of road traffic offences were heard and Judge Devins pointed out quite clearly when hearing evidence that in matters of law "there is either truth or untruth – evidence is black and white!" Interesting then (a couple of driving offences later) that the Judge began the first of a couple of accounts related to her experiences since presiding over cases related to the Shell to Sea campaign.

The defence for four men including Pat O Donnell (previously sentenced to three months by Judge Devins on the back of conflicting statements by Gardai) had requested a different judge as the case relating to Mr O Donnell was currently going through the appeals process. It was imperative he said not only that justice be done but also that justice is seen to be done by the reasonable man in the back of the courtroom. " I hadn't meant to bring this up" she said then proceeded to tell the courtroom that she had received hate mail and that she had read vicious attacks about herself on Indymedia since she had been dealing with Shell to Sea related cases. Judge Devins stated that she considered the independence of the judiciary to be sacrosanct and, that given her record of impartiality over the last eight years, she would refuse to disqualify herself from ruling on the case.

Some observers outside felt that this admission was worrying given that there was no way of verifying the origin of such mail and that this effectively acted as a slur against the whole campaign. Shell to Sea does not condone either physical or verbal attacks on people as the last press release will testify http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=1517 That hate-mail is cowardly (anonymous or otherwise) goes without saying - I would encourage the judge to pursue this through the proper channels. As for indymedia however, I do find it worrying that people (protesters and judges alike) still can't get their heads round the concept of a website that allows everyone to express their opinion. Anything illegal or slanderous would be dropped as the editors do take their role seriously. If the judge has a problem with anything for legal reasons I would encourage her either a) to contact her the editorial collective or b) to write her own account of events.

Back in the courtroom it was time for Tadgh McGraths case, the Gardai gave evidence that didn't match either video evidence or other Garda testimony. The case seemed to fold under the weight of the arresting officer's account (which had more than a few holes in it). He couldn't remember anything from the day it was to conversations about whether he had been drinking the night before. As the Garda in question stumbled around the dark recesses of his dwindling "memory" his colleagues seemed to be laughing about it. This really did seem ridiculous, I can't for the life of me understand why they were laughing. What was rather telling was that a couple of Gards stated that their role at Bellanaboy bridge was to protect the peat-lorries from pedestrians, it would appear that occasionally even they tell the truth.

When cross-examined by the prosecution Mr McGrath was asked why he had come to the area. He clarified that it was due to his disagreement with the highly dangerous proposed inland refinery. "Why else?" – To ensure that the Irish people ensure a fairer deal from the exploitation of their natural resources. When Superintendent Doyle stated that any pushing and shoving that took place at Bellanaboy bridge was for the protesters own safety the courtroom erupted into laughter. Judge Devins stated that the Gardai evidence was at best incomplete and at worst misleading by omission. The case was dismissed.

Another Shell to Sea related case was heard after this relating to John Monaghan who was accused of assaulting a Garda outside a polling station. A Garda had been approached by the gentleman on election day and asked what his function was inside a polling station or, if the officer is to be believed, "who was voting for Shell". The officer claimed that he asked Mr Monaghan to go outside where he was then jabbed with two elbows, had his foot stamped on and was pushed onto a car. Mr Monaghan's account was that the Garda pushed him and then claimed that he had committed an assault. The accused's wife was the only separate witness to the incident and described what she saw as a discussion and an officer sitting down on the bonnet of a car. The arresting officer hadn't pursued any witness statements from people inside the polling station, where some of the alleged incident was meant to have taken place The case really hung upon whether the Judge believes Mr Monaghan or the arresting officer. She put the case forward until a couple of questions have been looked into – most interestingly upon what authority the Gardai reside inside polling stations on election day. More on this case in October…

Finally the decision relating to five protesters who locked themselves together outside Sramore Peat deposition was put off until the following day in Ballycroy when they were given community service.

Upon reflection I find the whole courtroom spectacle worrying -coming from a context where the police can at least get their lies straight it's embarrassing to watch grown men fibbing under oath. When people's lives hang in the balance because an officer of the law takes a dislike to them embarrassment becomes disdain. By this stage a couple of human rights organisations have raised serious concerns about political policing in the area. It's about time that the officers making these bogus claims were held to account. The Judge seemed genuinely surprised that people were fearful of the Gardai, perhaps now it is becoming apparent that a number of prosecutions before her are being fabricated for dubious reasons. Perhaps more of these court cases together with investigations by the ombudsman will blow the lid off this corrupt trend of politically motivated prosecutions.

Judge Devins stated in relation to the matter of hate mail that the cowards didn't leave their name. Having seen the conduct of the Gardai towards other members of the campaign I'm not about to open myself up to some bogus assault charge upon their say so. I hope the judge will understand that even if this makes me a coward at least I won't be wasting the courts time. These are strange times – I'm sure the judge is beginning to wish that this whole debacle wasn't taking place in front of her. It runs the risk of making a mockery of the legal process. Maybe she understands how the people of the community feel about the project – they didn't ask for this to land on their doorstep any more than she asked for it to spill over into her courtroom. What strikes me as worse is the surprise some people expressed over her decision in relation to Mr McGrath. It's a sad fact that people seem surprised that a judge can be impartial when doing her job in today's Ireland.