Finally a response on behalf of the Minister ( after 14 months )

Friday afternoon this is an email My cousin Henry and myself were sent from the Department of Justice. We had a meeting with the Minister last year and she promised to get back to us after the summer break. We heard nothing and both of us wrote to the Minister and got not reply. On the 8th of August a letter was sent to the  Ombudsman complaining about the Minister’s non response to our meeting and letters. As a result of which the following was received by email. Interesting to see if hard copies will follow

 

 

Minister’s Reference: 0718095057

26  August, 2016

Dear Mr. McCourt,

I  have  been  asked by the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality,
Ms.  Frances Fitzgerald T.D., to refer to her meeting with you and Mr. Bill
Maher  on 1 July 2015, the matters outlined in the documents which you gave
to her at the meeting and in your subsequent correspondence.

In  the  first instance, I should say that it is a matter of regret that it
did  not  prove  possible  to  issue  a definitive response until now.   Of
course,  the  papers  submitted  by  you  had  to  be fully reviewed by the
Tánaiste  since  originally  submitted and she wanted to take the time that
was  necessary to fully consider all of the matters raised in light of your
strong  concerns.   Moreover,  you  will  appreciate  that  in the interim,
events, relating to other pressing matters, placed very significant demands
on the Tánaiste’s time.

The  Tánaiste  would  like,  once  again,  to  acknowledge the very sincere
support  which many people have conveyed to you and your family in relation
to the death of your uncle, Fr. Molloy, and the extent of the efforts which
have  been  made over many years to obtain answers to the various questions
which have been raised about the case.

The  Tánaiste has reflected on the issues discussed with you at the meeting
and  as referred to in the documentation supplied and sympathises with you.
However,  the  detailed  examination by the SCRT of the case, together with
Mr.  McGinn’s  subsequent  report,  lead  her  to conclude that there is no
reasonable  prospect  that  a  further  inquiry  would  give  rise  to more
conclusive  results.   The  objective  expressed  in  Mr. McGinn’s terms of
reference  was to obtain definitive independent advice on the question of a
further inquiry and having received such advice, it would be highly unusual
for the Tánaiste not to take it on board.

The  Tánaiste  has also considered your comments on the shortcomings of the
original  Garda  investigation but as you note in your documentation, these
have  been  highlighted  by  the  SCRT  and  were  outlined  and  carefully
considered  by Mr. McGinn in arriving at his recommendations concerning any
further  inquiry. While the Tánaiste fully appreciates your dissatisfaction
with these aspects of the original investigation, she does not believe that
a  further  inquiry  to  examine  these specific matters would be viable or
warranted  at  this  remove.  As  stated  in  previous  correspondence, the
Tánaiste  is of the view that a further inquiry would most likely come to a
similar assessment in relation to the original Garda investigation and such
an  assessment  is  already  available  and in the public domain.  In these
circumstances,  and  given  the  passage  of  time  and  the  evolution  of
investigatory  practice  since then, the establishment of a further inquiry
into these matters would not be of material public benefit.

The  Tánaiste  is  very much aware that unanswered questions in relation to
the  case  remain and are of course a cause of concern for the family.  She
sympathises  with your desire to see further steps taken in relation to the
investigation  but, as you know, the case has been considered by the DPP on
foot  of  the  SCRT  report  and  a  direction received that there not be a
further  prosecution.   The  Tánaiste  has  no role in that process, but by
publishing  Mr.  McGinn’s report has taken exceptional measures to put into
the public domain as much information as possible in relation to a criminal
investigation,  and  in  relation  to the steps taken to examine the issues
which have been raised concerning the case over many years.

Having carefully considered the points which you raised at the meeting, and
in  your correspondence, the Tánaiste remains of the view that there are no
further avenues open to her in relation to this matter, and that she is not
in a position to accede to your request to establish a further inquiry into
the case.

Yours sincerely,

Niall Colgan
Private Secretary to the
Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality

CC Mr. Bill Maher 

Book of Evidence contradicts important witness statement

In the opening pages of the Book of Evidence a key witness who was present in Kilcoursey house is dismissed as not important because he was not in the house at a certain time that evening.

This comment made by a senior Garda Completely contradicts the witness’s own signed statement which is included later on in the report.

 

No one has picked up on this despite it having been examined again by Gardai, the DPP’s office, Dept.of Justice experts and Journalists who have reviewed the case.

Fine Gael need my help

14th Jan. 2016 Yesterday evening I returned home to be greeted by my local Fine Gael TD out canvassing for votes in the upcoming election. Fine Gael needs my help ( my vote ) to get re elected in 2016.

 

1985 My uncle Fr Niall Molloy was murdered in Clara Co. Offaly. My family felt naively that under a Fine Gael Government that his death would be investigated properly.We were wrong, very wrong.

Michael Noonan was Minister for Justice that year

1986 Was the year of the trial of Richard Flynn. He was never arrested but simply ordered to appear in Court to answer charges. The Judge ( Judge Roe ) dismissed the Jury on the grounds that Niall could have died from a heart attack. There were a lot of protests at the time regarding the trial but we were assured that the Inquest would answer many questions that for the family.

The Inquest concluded that Niall had actually died as a result of an injury to the head. Again we thought that the Fine Gael Government would do something, but no. The Minister of Justice at that time was Alan Dukes

Fast forward to my meeting Alan Shatter who gave me some encouragement when in opposition  but refused to meet the family when he became Minister for Justice.

I met with Govt. Minister Lucinda Creighton  F.G. who was my local TD. That meeting was a waste of time. And it was a vote I will not waste again in the coming election

Various inquiries were made over recent years. A review was held into those inquiries bur the SC in charge did not speak to the family. We objected to the Terms of Reference but our objections fell on deaf ears.

We asked for meeting with both Alan Shatter and Frances Fitzgerald but were refused.

In July of 2015 we were finally granted a meeting with Minister for Justice Frances Fitzgerald. We outlined our observations and objections to the review and presented her with documents and photographs at the meeting. She promised she would revert back to us after the Summer break. That was last July. She has not come back to us despite saying that she found some of the evidence we had presented “very disturbing”,

She did seem interested  when I told her that my grandfather W J Molloy served as a  Senator from 1922 – 1931.

Many of my family including myself had voted for Fine Gael for most of our lives. We were not begging them for help we just expected Justice would be done while they were in power. We expected that from them and we trusted them with our votes.

 2016 NOW THEY ARE BACK AT MY DOOR ASKING ME FOR MY TRUST AND MY VOTE.

 Now Fine Gael wants MY help.

Bill Maher – Nephew of Fr Niall Molloy

Minister rejects Molloy case cover up

Minister rejects Molloy case cover up

Minister rejects Molloy case cover up

Shatter brings High Court challenge to findings of Guerin report

Article from Irish Times :-

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/shatter-brings-high-court-challenge-to-findings-of-guerin-report-1.1882564?utm_source=lunchtime-digest&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=digests

“Former minister for justice Alan Shatter has initiated a High Court challenge aimed at quashing certain findings of the Guerin report concerning Mr Shatter’s handling of claims by Garda whistleblower Maurice McCabe.

In his action, Mr Shatter alleges objective bias, absence of fair procedures and “indecent haste” on the part of senior counsel Sean Guerin in how he compiled his report and reached conclusions critical of the minister.

Mr Shatter resigned following publication of the report last May, in which his handling of Sgt McCabe’s claims was strongly criticised.

Among Mr Shatter’s complaints is Mr Guerin should have interviewed him prior to reaching conclusions on a range of issues. This was very important given that the conclusions had gravely affected his career and reputation, Mr Shatter said.

Had he been interviewed, Mr Shatter said that would have shown he had not deferred to the former Garda Commissioner’s view concerning the allegations by Sgt McCabe.

Today, Patrick O’Reilly SC, for Mr Shatter, secured leave from Ms Justice Marie Baker to bring judicial review proceedings against Mr Guerin for orders quashing various findings in the report.

Among various claims, it is alleged the report was compiled in breach of principles of natural and constitutional justice and fair procedures. He has also alleged objective bias on the part of Mr Guerin.

It is also alleged the terms of reference for the report did not entitle Mr Guerin to reach the conclusions he had. There was failure to consider all the relevant documents, including documents from Mr Shatter and the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission. It is alleged Mr Guerin regarded himself as bound by a fixed eight-week time limit and he should have, but failed, to take the additional time necessary for the report. It is alleged “indecent haste” in concluding the report led to errors, including alleged failure to fully engage with the process.

Mr O’Reilly said his side was also exhibiting legal advices given to the Attorney General which were given to Mr Guerin. These were not brought to Mr Shatter’s attention until after the report was concluded, Mr O’Reilly said.

Mr Shatter had asked for and was subsequently given those advices without any claim of privilege, counsel added.

In those circumstances, his client was arguing privilege was waived. Those advices played a “crucial role” in relation to the report and it was Mr Shatter’s case Mr Guerin misread part of those advices.

The advice was the Garda Commissioner should have dealt with the matter but Mr Guerin misconstrued part of that advice in considering the Minister should have dealt with it, Mr O’Reilly said.

Ms Justice Baker said she was conscious of the sensitivity of that advice and issues may arise in that regard.

Former minister for justice Alan Shatter has initiated a High Court challenge aimed at quashing certain findings of the Guerin report concerning Mr Shatter’s handling of claims by Garda whistleblower Maurice McCabe.

In his action, Mr Shatter alleges objective bias, absence of fair procedures and “indecent haste” on the part of senior counsel Sean Guerin in how he compiled his report and reached conclusions critical of the minister.

Mr Shatter resigned following publication of the report last May, in which his handling of Sgt McCabe’s claims was strongly criticised

Among Mr Shatter’s complaints is Mr Guerin should have interviewed him prior to reaching conclusions on a range of issues. This was very important given that the conclusions had gravely affected his career and reputation, Mr Shatter said.

Had he been interviewed, Mr Shatter said that would have shown he had not deferred to the former Garda Commissioner’s view concerning the allegations by Sgt McCabe.

Today, Patrick O’Reilly SC, for Mr Shatter, secured leave from Ms Justice Marie Baker to bring judicial review proceedings against Mr Guerin for orders quashing various findings in the report.

Among various claims, it is alleged the report was compiled in breach of principles of natural and constitutional justice and fair procedures. He has also alleged objective bias on the part of Mr Guerin.

It is also alleged the terms of reference for the report did not entitle Mr Guerin to reach the conclusions he had. There was failure to consider all the relevant documents, including documents from Mr Shatter and the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission. It is alleged Mr Guerin regarded himself as bound by a fixed eight-week time limit and he should have, but failed, to take the additional time necessary for the report. It is alleged “indecent haste” in concluding the report led to errors, including alleged failure to fully engage with the process.

Mr O’Reilly said his side was also exhibiting legal advices given to the Attorney General which were given to Mr Guerin. These were not brought to Mr Shatter’s attention until after the report was concluded, Mr O’Reilly said.

Mr Shatter had asked for and was subsequently given those advices without any claim of privilege, counsel added.

In those circumstances, his client was arguing privilege was waived. Those advices played a “crucial role” in relation to the report and it was Mr Shatter’s case Mr Guerin misread part of those advices.

The advice was the Garda Commissioner should have dealt with the matter but Mr Guerin misconstrued part of that advice in considering the Minister should have dealt with it, Mr O’Reilly said.

Ms Justice Baker said she was conscious of the sensitivity of that advice and issues may arise in that regard.”

When Mr Shatter appointed Mr Dominic McGinn SC to look at Niall’s case our complain was that Mr McGinn was not asked to look at all relevant documents i.e. the first Garda investigation.

Strange he is now making the very same complaints we have made against him and now find ourselves trying to get Frances Fitzgerald to listen to us.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/fionnan-sheahan/this-culture-of-secrecy-did-not-begin-on-purcells-watch-30466331.html

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/fionnan-sheahan/this-culture-of-secrecy-did-not-begin-on-purcells-watch-30466331.html

Alan Shatter on Judge Frank Roe ?

Alan Shatter’s comments in the Dail today were NOT about Judge Frank Roe’s behaviour in the 1986 trial in the death of Niall Molloy. He was lashing out against SC Sean Guerin.

“These principles are crucial to the rule of law and ignoring them places in peril a value system crucial to the wellbeing of all our citizens and all who reside in the State.’’

Mr Shatter was speaking in the Dail this afternoon during a debate on the Cooke report into claims of unlawful surveillance of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission.”

It would have been interesting, when he was Minister, to have heard his view on how the 1986 trial was conducted. But then we will not know his views as he refused to meet with members of the Molloy family once he was elected to government.

Fr. Molloy and the Gardai. Five years on

January 2009 is when I first made contact with the Garda Cold Case unit. After the initial contact things seemed to be going nowhere until I mentioned that I had met with the GSOC. Things started to happen then and after a few short meeting with two Detectives they suggested that I should write to the Garda Commissioner. We are now five years on the the family have had no answers. There seems to a very cross party reluctance to bring the case to a proper conclusion.

Garda Inquiries finished in March 2013 yet it took Alan Shatted almost a year to appoint an Sc to look at the Garda report. We have heard no more and we are very unhappy with the terms of reference.

From day one we have always asked for an investigation into how the case was handled in 1985 -1988. This has not been done and has been left outside the terms of reference given to Dominic McGinn. This is not acceptable and we will not rest until Garda  behaviour  ( and others ) is examined in detail.

 

Fr Niall Molloy. Letter from Taoiseach Enda Kenny

A letter from our Prime Minister Enda Kenny

A letter from our Prime Minister Enda Kenny

The above is the end of a letter to a family member written by the Taoiseach on 26th. Feb 2014. The reason I am not showing the rest of the letter is because it is a boring copy of the type of letter many people have had from the Dept of Justice. Blah , Blah.

The Taoiseach signs off by saying ” I have asked Minister shatter to have his officials keep you updated on this”. Well Taoiseach that never happened. We never heard from ex Minister Shatter’s officials since, or from Minister Shatter, or from you.