Following Barra McGrory’s grilling by the Stormont Justice Committee following publication of the NI Attorney-General’s report on his PPS’ handling of the Liam Adam’s prosecution, Peter Sefton asks some pertinent follow-up’s:
Aside from the considerable interest the press and public would have taken had Barra appeared as a witness for the defence or the prosecution [see Larkin para 4.49-4.51] in the trial of Liam Adams, a number of other points arise from the Starmer and Larkin reports.
1. Why was Gerry Adams, Barra’s former client, not called in the second trial? The answer to the justice committee from the Deputy director was “technical reasons” [ a well known legal term] and the volume of potential disclosure. One wonders if this disclosure related to Gerry’s terrorist activities and/or his usefulness to the state. It may well be another example of where intelligence held by the state intrudes into the administration of justice.
2. Whilst taking responsibility for the AA/BB/Cahill shambles Barra blamed the two prosecuting barristers. Asked by the justice committee about his civil servants , his response was that of the…
View original post 519 more words