Gerry Adams’ decision to sue Independent Newspapers over a piece published in the Irish Independent reporting that the North’s Police Ombudsman is investigating a complaint that he was briefed by the PSNI about the details of the case against his pedophile brother Liam before he gave evidence at his brother’s trial, is really aimed at silencing the media over the Jean McConville disappearance.
The story of that complaint to the Ombudsman was reproduced in the Indo’s sister paper, the Belfast Telegraph and can be read here.
Gerry Adams knows that one only has to whisper the words “libel action” in the ears of the Irish and British media for editors to run for cover over any story concerning the individual making the threat. While Mr Adams certainly has cause for concern if the complaint to the Ombudsman is upheld, he has perhaps a greater interest in killing off the Jean McConville story.
Interestingly the person who lodged the complaint is Liam Adams’ second wife Bronagh, and that suggests intense family strife over Gerry’s decision to turn against Liam in the witness box.
The real story he wants to quosh is the one about his alleged part in the disappearance of Jean McConville, especially if there is more damaging material ready to spill out, material he perhaps learned about during his brief sojourn in Antrim PSNI station.
It is my guess that he will be hoping that the threat of a lawsuit about the Indo story will have a knock-on effect on editors and they will practice caution about everything to do with Gerry Adams.
This is a time for the media to keep its nerve. Threatening a lawsuit does not mean that it will end up in court. Often lawsuits are threatened just to silence the media and Adams does have a problem should he decide to follow through. A case like this revolves almost entirely around the credibility of the person bringing the complaint and in Adams’ case that means a libel case will become a trial over whether he was or was not a member of the IRA. He will have to take the witness box and if his interrogator is again Eilis McDermott, then all bets are off.
If he has any sense he won’t be tempted to go the full mile. The number of witnesses ready to swear he was in the IRA is likely to circle the law courts in downtown Belfast several times.
The Broken Elbow 
Adams pulled the same stunt in the run up to the 2011 Dail elections when he threatened to sue the Herald over their coverage of the Jean McConville murder. The Herald quite rightly referred Adams to the case of Arkell v Pressdram.
thanks for this ray. an account of Arkell vs Pressdram is contained on Private Eye’s wikipedia page. it reads as follows: ‘An unlikely piece of British legal history occurred in what is now referred to as the “case” of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971). The plaintiff was the subject of an article relating to illicit payments, and the magazine had ample evidence to back up the article. Arkell’s lawyers wrote a letter which concluded: “His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply.” The magazine’s response was, in full: “We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell’s attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off.” In the years following, the magazine would refer to this exchange as a euphemism for a blunt and coarse dismissal: for example, “We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram”. As with “tired and emotional” this usage has spread beyond the magazine.’
The Indo has repeated the allegation again today in its lead story. Clearly they are not going to be intimidated or silenced by Adams. One can only hope Adams will continue his legal action but I won’t be holding my breath.