PSNI engage in trial by media against Sean Hoey

by Thomas Fri May 06, 2005 15:31

this guy will get a fair trial, we cant go on forever about british injustice, where is the justice for the victims of this heinous crime, so what if he had the indignity of being arrested, who cares he never came the 29 people in omagh a change to live (also the 2 unborn babies)

may this guy and all like him get what they deserve and SF and all their supporters you need to realise people dont want criminals in govt and thats what they are criminals and nothing else

by Sherlock Holmes Fri May 06, 2005 16:25

Thats great Thomas. Certainly he wont get a fair trial. I have no idea whether he is guilty or not, however, like everyone else he deserves a fair trial. An unjustified act should not be met by another unjustified act. And as for Sinn Fein, as you will see throughout the day Sinn Fein's vote has again risen. But thanks for the analysis anyway.

by Thomas Fri May 06, 2005 16:34

It has risen because people up north are afraid of them, they intimidate and then kill people who disagree with them and as for Hoey ley him rot in jail fair trial or not, ther dogs in the street know he is guilty

by Barry Fri May 06, 2005 16:36

He hasnt even been charged yet but Thomas has him down as guilty anyway , and still claims hell get a fair trial .

There is virtually no evidence against Sean , his upcoming bail application was a virtual certainty given that he has no prior convictions .

By leaking details like this to the press the ensuing media circus is clearly intended to make him notorious in the public mind and to scupper whatever hope he might have of a fair trial .

Maybe Thomas can fill us in on what he thinks of the OLoan report and the manufacturing by police of 357 pieces of evidence such as witness statements ?

Any more incisive insights from Thomas ?

by Thomas Fri May 06, 2005 16:50

It's amazing the amount of shinners and terrorist apologists that surf this site

What about the victims of terrorism

are you saying that this guy was just picked on that there is absolutely no evidence linking him to any terrost crim or are you SF spin doctors spreading shit and lies.

Terrorism has no place on this land and the perpetrators of terrorism like this hoey wanker deserve to be hanged

by Barry Fri May 06, 2005 17:52

Youre only trolling and not even attempting to discuss this very serious issue . You dont know the guy or anything about the case , which has absolutely nothing to do with Sinn Fein ( i dont either)
please take a hike as your only displaying your own ignorance with virtually every one of your time wasting sentences .

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 00:31

This is just classic!

by cod Sat May 07, 2005 00:36

What do you mean Rooster?

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 00:42

where do I start?

"highly publicised and clearly leaked intent of the PSNI and the British DPP to charge"

-well, of course its highly publicised! it was a massive bomb that blew up thirty women and children, a statement is always made when someone is helping the police with their enquiries, so leaked is hardly the appropriate word.

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 00:47

of course that is what it is intended to do, if and I say if this guy did murder thirty women and children the chances are he is not going to turn up at the courthouse for his hearing.

"reputable firm of lawyers", does such a thing exist? A contradiction in terms surely?

"strong and well prepared" well of course the solicitors would say that as they are the ones who prepared it so they are hardly impartial are they?

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 00:49

"this is not the first such stunt attempting to portray Sean Hoey in the public mind as guilty of the heinous crime of mass murder"


so he has been suspected of carrying out other acts of mass murder? which ones?

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 00:52

"They havent as yet produced any actual evidence that Sean Hoey has even been to Omagh , planted a bomb or killed anyone"

by cod Sat May 07, 2005 00:55

As far as I understand, the man has not even been charged as yet?

How then did this information become public fodder before the accused has even had the opportunity to be presented with details of the proposed charges against him?

Leak/fed/given – whatever it’s called – the fact that this man’s ‘guilt’ is already presumed by posters here, let alone by mainstream media, prior to him even being served/charged is damning proof that the poor bastard will not be receiving a fair trial.

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 02:08

might as well just let him go then.............

by Rooster Sat May 07, 2005 02:33

"As far as I understand, the man has not even been charged as yet? How then did this information become public fodder before the accused has even had the opportunity to be presented with details of the proposed charges against him? Leak/fed/given – whatever it’s called – the fact that this man’s ‘guilt’ is already presumed by posters here, let alone by mainstream media, prior to him even being served/charged is damning proof that the poor bastard will not be receiving a fair trial."

-the police arrested the guy and told the media/public that they had done this, what is your problem with how this was done?
Maybe you would rather live in a country where the police arrest people, hold them and not say anything about it?

-Internment I think they call it, don't you think cod that the public have a right to know what the NIPS/Gardai are doing to catch the people responsible for the Omagh bombing?

by cod Sat May 07, 2005 04:10

Yes rooster, obviously someone did ‘bomb Omagh’. I think we are able to agree upon that one. I’m afraid you’ve lost me on the rest of your reasoning though.

With regard to the proposed charges that have apparently been bandied about in other media, the man has not been arrested on these particular charges and they have not been put to him or his legal counsel, as I understand. My problem with the public having knowledge of the charges that may/are to be laid then, is that the man’s name has been put out into the public field for kicking about in relation to a bombing that brought massive grief and desolation to all concerned, and is obviously a highly emotive issue. There is a step between the prosecution deciding they have sufficient evidence to proceed with charges and actually presenting the accused with the charges and during this time, the process is not open for public consultation!

My further problems with this entire situation (though there are many and were the process as you have stated) – include those pesky little concepts like the presumption of innocence over guilt – we still have that (in theory) don’t we? There is also the issue of the matter being sub judice, were it as you stated remember.

And yes rooster, I do believe the public have a right to know what the NIPS/Gardai are doing to catch those responsible for the Omagh bombing… I absolutely believe that in fact, but I am firmly of the opinion that this right is not met via media vilification of the fellow involved here. If you are claiming that this right is being met by the recent publications of his name and Omagh etc…, why not have ALL of the details/leads/propositions about the Omagh investigation made public? Why are we only seeing this select matter disclosed at this time? Surely the entire investigation & associated resources have not focussed soley on this one man? Let’s hear the whole of it – all the theories laid out - I like that idea actually rooster - best to be fully informed.

I am also of the opinion that this right about which you speak is to be tempered by obligations: upon the public to demand presentation of valid facts/evidence rather hysteria to support any allegations or charges ONCE laid; upon the media to obey the criminal process and refrain from conducting a public lynching; and upon the PSNI/Gardai/DPP etc to follow due process and ultimately present evidence that is able to withstand scrutiny beyond reasonable doubt (oh yes, and of course that means evidence that has not been fabricated by those who have the moral and legal duty to protect citizens generally and to abide by the rules they have sworn to uphold – refer to Colm Murphy’s trial if in doubt on this point).

But before we even get to these stages, the man has not been charged. You have him guilty already. I am not able to say that he did or did not have any role as per any present allegations. I am readily able to say that if/when he is charged, his right to a fair trial and the presumptions that supposedly form the basis of criminal law have been disregarded so far. If it’s good enough to cast these rules aside on this occasion, why not the next, and the next and the next…

by barry Sat May 07, 2005 13:04

The first media stunt against this man was his high profile arrest in 2003 , conducted by a massive ( 200 strong) military force in front of a waiting media throng . When Sean Hoey was arrested on a previous occasion there was nothing remotely like the forces present later , so therefore that was clearly a stunt laid on for the national and international media who were massed overlooking the scene .

Despite announcing at that time he was going to be charged in relation to Omagh NONE of the charges laid against him actually concerned Omagh . Furthermore these charges themselves were basically without any substance , and it was becoming a foregone conclusion that not only did the crown not have a case against the man but that he would be released on bail . The case against him was farcical .

It should be remembered that Sean Hoeys initial arrest came against the backdrop of calls by relatives of the Omagh victims for a public enquiry into the bombing . As the Nuala OLoan report into the bombing has highlighted there is much that the police , army and state dont want scrutinised in any enquiry . Sean Hoeys highly public arrest and the extremely weak basis of the trumped up charges against him are nothing more than a cynical attempt to stave off calls for a public enquiry from the Omagh relatives .

It is clear from what Peter Corrigan has pointed out the initial trumped up charges were on the verge of being exposed at Sean Hoeys bail hearing as flimsy in the extreme , and that granting of bail seemed a certainty . As was pointed out in court at Sean Hoeys initial remand Sean has a clean record and that he co-operated fully with police when arrested and questioned . This was agreed with by the police in court and the record bears this out . He simply has nothing to hide .

The leaks to the media of possible further charges of 29 murders are clearly an attempt to scupper Seans case for bail . If Sean Hoey got bail the spotlight would fall on the PSNI yet again and the growing calls for a public enquiry into Omagh would become much harder for the state to ignore ( as they pointedly have done) .

Sean Hoey was an easy target for arrest simply because he was a known relative of Colm Murphy , who was himself stitched up by police on fabricated, perjured evidence and trumped up charges . This is why he has been singled out for arrest and is now being used by the PSNI as a sacrificial pawn to evade the scrutiny of a public enquiry into Omagh . This would be near impossible to avoid should he be set free on bail .

Sean Hoeys stitch up is just another part of the same cover up into Omagh which Nuala OLoan has exposed in her report .

by Rooster Sun May 08, 2005 05:16

The DPP authorised the prosecution after a new investigation that involved a complex 18-month review of all the scientific evidence by specialists from Toronto, New York and Switzerland.

Papers outlining details of the charges are due to be served this month on Hoey, 35, from Jonesborough, south Armagh. He is also accused of explosives charges, as well as possessing timer units allegedly linked to several mortar, car and roadside bombs in the months before Omagh.

Hoey, who is due to appear at a remand hearing at Craigavon, Co Armagh, this month, denies any involvement in the Omagh attack.

by cod Sun May 08, 2005 08:03

Man, the warning bells are going off in my head! You'd be an absolute hit at a civil libertarian's do rooster!

Thank God you're not in a position of authority hmmm. To even consider basing a guilty conviction for 29 deaths on a piece of blurb that you've taken from another source, the veracity of which you have apparently neither the ability nor conscience to confirm, is terrifying.

Even based upon the snippet from an article that you've posted here, the man has not even been charged as yet!

by rooster Sun May 08, 2005 17:56

''To even consider basing a guilty conviction for 29 deaths on a piece of blurb that you've taken from another source, the veracity of which you have apparently neither the ability nor conscience to confirm, is terrifying.
Even based upon the snippet from an article that you've posted here, the man has not even been charged as yet!''



-cod your full of drivel!
do you really think the police went out one morning thinking "'hey I know, lets just grab someone at random''
I don't think so,
''the veracity of which you have apparently neither the ability nor conscience to confirm''
well, what I did was was type his name into a search engine and hey presto theres all the articles you need, try it sometime.

Lets face it, people like you will bitch and whine about this guys ''rights and civil liberties'' but you don't spare a thought for the people they murder!
The man is helping the police with their enquiries, when they have finished gathering their evidence then he will be charged, until then quit your whining, if they dont have enough evidence for a conviction he will be released, OK?

by SINEAD Wed May 18, 2005 22:48

The 37-year-old had been questioned about the 1998 atrocity at Antrim police station yesterday.

The bombing killed 29 people and unborn twins - the worst single terrorist atrocity during the Northern Ireland Troubles.

An unemployed electrician from Molly Road, Jonesborough, is expected to appear before a court later this week charged with the murders.

Sean Gerard Hoey (35) is currently in police custody over the attack.

He is denying 20 charges which relate to possessing explosives and conspiracy to cause explosions between 1997 and 1998.

He faces a charge of Real IRA membership as well as charges over bombings at Forkhill and Crossmaglen, Lisburn, Armagh City, Belleek, Newry, Blackwater and Belfast.

by Barry Wed May 18, 2005 23:31

With no evidence at all, only media spin . If the cops have the evidence why the need for media stunts ?
Weve seen this before in Colm Murphys case . This is simply intended to avoid a public enquiry into the whole stinking corrupt mess .

by rooster Thu May 19, 2005 13:11

then we'll see who's laughing, 71 charges, do you think he will get of all of them?

media spin? give me an example of this non-existant tactic?

by Al Thu May 19, 2005 15:30

Yep, the reports and information was leaked allright, the PSNI did it so he couldnt get a fair trial and the case would be dismissed. Hang on a second, wouldnt that be a good thing for him and a bad thing for the PSNI? Im confused, surely its not media spin by his defence?
So your in favour of knowing what the PSNI/gardai are doing are you? How can you know without information being printed in papers? Or would you like special permission to visit stations and go through confidential files?
Heres a cake, would you like to eat it?

by soundmigration Thu May 19, 2005 16:18

would have thought you prefered doughnuts mate!!!

by Derek Thu May 19, 2005 16:31

The guy has been held for along time now with no evidence presented that he had anything to do with the charges presented to him. His solicitor has asked for the evidence so they can take independent tests however this has been refused, the judge has expressed his doubts and yet still refuses bail. Something strange going on, I can see another mis - justice about to happen, maybe a film etc to follow where the media do well out of it all ways.

by Ian Thu May 19, 2005 16:51

Hope the scumbag goes down for life, but thats too good for him, why all the crying for a terrorists what about the victims

by barry Thu May 19, 2005 17:03

Why did it only take a handful of cops and soldiers to arrest him previously , and then a virtual military invasion to arrest him with half the worlds media looking on a month later ?

The media were specifically told to be there by the PSNI. They had no evidence against him and used the huge military presence as justification .That was undoubtedly a media stunt , as was the anonymous leaking to the press weeks ago they intended to charge him with 29 murders . His solicitor was speaking to the DPP that very day and there was no mention of charges .

The mans bail application, after 2 years in jail was virtually certain to succeed because of the lack of evidence against him . Thats the reason for the media spin campaign against him . If he were to be granted bail the calls for a public enquiry into Omagh couldnt be ignored . By charging him the state can adopt the same tactic they used in the Finucane case , there can be no enquiry because a case is before the court . If sentenced Sean will no doubt appeal which will result in a further delay in any enquiry for years .

This stitch up is part of the cover up surrounding Omagh . Anyone wyho wishes to read confidential files about the case should just type "cryptome" and "Omagh "into their google . Some very interesting stuff .

by peacewalker Thu May 19, 2005 17:24 justice at hotmail dot com

I was a nurse in Omagh and I believe in my heart and soul that the Omagh Bombing was not done by an Irish Man but was the work of the real terriorist.....who they are good question......did they use Northern Ireland as a training ground and the Irish People as fodder for there new world order, who benfits from this bombing...not the people
Look at world events and look critically at Northern Ireland.......

Northern Ireland was used as a traning ground for the war now being staged against
New York
Bagdad
Kubul
The list goes on and on......
mircohipped dumbed down robots

The people of Ireland are good,that border and sectariam divisions were created a long time ago but the faceless cabal of blood sucking reptiles..cold blooded killer who will stop at nothing to bring forward there agenda world domination of the human spirit and they have fooled everyone of you.

My symapthies go out to the human beings whose lives get taken as the fine people of Omagh on Saturday 15 th August 1998 at 3.p.m. on a day that celebrated Mary Queen of Heaven's asscension into heaven,

These killers do not care about land of life they are an abomination on earth and need to return to the black hole in space where they are from. WHo planted the Omagh Bomb try seeing a robotic human possibility brain washed and mind controlled just like the driver of Princess Diana's car.

Mr. Hoey is not guilty and never was God Bless his family.

I was in Omagh and I saw the events
The bastard let that bomb go off, they sent the people into the bomb, Why can't the survivors stand up and see like them Mr. Hoey is being used.

If only we had more investigative reporters who are awake.

by Pinching myself Thu May 19, 2005 17:29

Sleepwalker more like.

by Al Thu May 19, 2005 17:38

not really into doughnuts Im afraid but I do like coffee.

Peace,
Is it just paranoia or have you proof of your claims?

by Barry Thu May 19, 2005 18:07

It was proven at the trial of Michael McKevitt that MI5/FBI agent David Rupert was the man who initiated the plan to bomb Omagh . He even videotaped the street on a scouting mission of his own planning . He scouted the area for an attack and even did a dummy run . This was revealed by disclosure of his email traffic to his MI5 handlers .

It has since been revealed by garda special branch detective john white that the branch supplied the car for the bombing through their agent Paddy Dixon . Detective White claims that his superior who authorised the supply of the car was trained by and worked on a daily basis with MI5. Both Dixon and the MI5 guard have left the 26 county jurisdiction since White went public with his claims .

It has now emerged that an anonymous caller who phoned the police in Omagh warning them of a planned attack in Omagh on the 15th of August , 2 weeks before was in fact a member of RUC special branch .

Nuala O'Loans report into the supposed investigation into the bombing has revealed how key pieces of evidence were either destroyed or went missing , including the Omagh RUCs log book . 100s of witness statements just disappeared and were then fabricated by RUC officers .

Sean Hoey is being stitched up to avoid a public enquiry into all of this . I know the man and his family personally and they were angered and sickened by what happened in Omagh . I know he had nothing to do with it .
Simply because he was related to Colm Murphy the PSNI reckoned they could tar him by association, thats why he was singled out for arrest and the media circus .

Since then it has emerged that Colm was stitched up by the Special Branch himself . When i initially pointed out on Indymedia that Colm was being fitted up the usual trolls here scoffed , but the subsequent charges against the lying Branch scum prove he was stitched up .

Sean Hoey is being fitted up simply to avoid a public enquiry into yet another mass murder that MI5s fingerprints are all over .

by Barry Thu May 19, 2005 19:03

The man has been publicly accused by his own brother and sister of being a predatory paedophile who sexually abused them throughout their childhood . They went public in the Scottish Herald as well as Ireland on Sunday . Just previous to the Omagh bombing he was interviewed by the RUC about allegations of sexual abuse against his own son who was killed in the bombing . His home and specifically a shed at the rear of his home were searched and forensically examined. Gallaghers response against these allegations by his own family is that its part of a RIRA plot against him . Strangely the plot seems to have existed long before the Omagh bomb .

I believe this mans high media profile is a disgrace , just as other bereaved from Omagh do and who have publicly distanced themselves from his group . With him as spokesperson for the victims group , which by the way only represents a small fraction of those killed in Omagh , there is little chance of anything but the official PSNI account being accepted .

by Rooster Fri May 20, 2005 01:54

Derek Thursday, May 19 2005, 3:31pm
The guy has been held for along time now with no evidence presented that he had anything to do with the charges presented to him.

-Derek, let me explain how things work, the police have evidence to arrest someone, they take the person into custody, gather more evidence and if they have a sufficient amount they prepare a case.
The accused appears in court and either pleads guilty or innocent to the charges.
Trust me, people behind the scenes have been busy collecting evidence for several years now, but no matter who is arrested for the bombing there will always be people on this board who cry "stitch up, he's been framed!''



barry Thursday, May 19 2005, 4:03pm
Why did it only take a handful of cops and soldiers to arrest him previously , and then a virtual military invasion to arrest him with half the worlds media looking on a month later ?
The media were specifically told to be there by the PSNI. They had no evidence against him and used the huge military presence as justification .His solicitor was speaking to the DPP that very day and there was no mention of charges.

-who cares how many cops it took to arrest him? Maybe the fact that the cops thought he was a mass murderer were grounds for more personnel, the media were told? bollox, oh yeah I can just imagine the PSNI picking up the phone to the Irish News!



Barry Thursday, May 19 2005, 5:07pm
It was proven at the trial..........

-no Barry, it was alleged at the trial, try to learn the difference between proof and an accusation.



Barry
I know the man and his family personally and they were angered and sickened by what happened in Omagh . I know he had nothing to do with it .

-well, thats some character reference, coming from someone who has been desperately trying to smear the Gallaghers and McConville's name on this board, your protestations of this guys innocence don't mean too much.

by Barry Fri May 20, 2005 02:18

It was PROVEN at the McKevitt trial that Ruperts e-mails show he initiated the Omagh bombing , videotaped the bomb site , carried out dummy runs and scouting . These emails were entered into evidence , they are true by his own admission . They are proof by any standard .

" I can just imagine them picking up the phone to the Irish News" - well they picked up the phone and told Sky News, UTV, BBC , RTE , TV3 and God knows who else . There were over 100 journalists at the scene overlooking Sean Hoeys house .

"people behind the scenes have been collecting evidence for several years now " Like fuck they have . Nuala OLoans report clearly shows they destroyed and suppressed evidence for several years .

As regards your accusation of my smearing Jean McConville , youre a lying bastard . Ive never smeared that womans name and have referred to her killing as a war crime . One of her daughters is a personal friend .

As for Michael Gallagher I havent "desperately been trying to smear him" . Ive no need . His own family have gone public and accused him of being a paedophile and a serial prolific sex abuser of both young boys and girls . Gallagher himself admits that he was questioned by police about allegations of sexually abusing ANOTHER member of his family ( believed to be his son) and that his home and shed were searched .

However his claim that this is all just a RIRA plot against him (thats what he said) should be judged by rational people and weighed up as to whether or not its true . Personally speaking I believe that he and Michael Jackson have more in common than just christian names ( as well as whiny annoying effeminate voices)

by cod Fri May 20, 2005 02:47

Rooster, where’d you get your law degree mate? To be writing with such apparent authority, you have very little actual knowledge or expertise. You are not quite up on criminal process are you? Your description of ‘how things work’ is not at all how things should work and save for a few malicious prosecutions, not how things do work in criminal law!

by Barry Fri May 20, 2005 14:34

Rooster, I know how the system works - explain why they won't allow the solicitors to have this so called evidence to have it looked at by an independent party (maybe they are giving themselves more time to stitch him up) and also why the judge said he wasn't sure they could prove it...?? I think you need to get you facts right rooster.

by Barry Fri May 20, 2005 16:48

Belfast solicitor Peter Corrigan has compared the case of Sean Hoey to the Birmingham 6 and Guildford 4.


He made a public appeal today for anyone concerned about the administration of justice to come along to the committal, find out about the case and make up their own minds.

"theres no use waiting 20 years to find out someone has been fitted up . If people had listened to Fr Raymond Murray and others in the 1970s then maybe the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 wouldnt have spent so long imprisoned on false pretences ."

"That is the scale of the miscarriage of justice which Mr Hoey is facing and I am now appealing for anyone who is interested in justice to objectively examine the details of this case for themselves and bring public scrutiny to bear on the prosecuting authorities and the nature of their case ."

by rooster Fri May 20, 2005 21:27

It was PROVEN at the McKevitt trial that Ruperts e-mails show he initiated the Omagh bombing , videotaped the bomb site , carried out dummy runs and scouting.

-NO we have not found everyone involved
in that days bomb attack and we will continue to pursue them.



There were over 100 journalists at the scene overlooking Sean Hoeys house.

-NO, there was a stand off, the security forces are not in the habit of tipping of the media before they move into an area, thats just a stupid remark from someone who has never been issued a weapon or bulled a pair of boots.




As regards your accusation of my smearing Jean McConville , youre a lying bastard . Ive never smeared that womans name

-Yes you have, you have in a previous post alleged that she was warned before her abduction that she was letting the Army use her house, that was a lie, you have been caught.



As for Michael Gallagher I havent "desperately been trying to smear him" . Ive no need . His own family have gone public

-they have made accusations against him, has he been convicted in a court of law?
Even if he is, what difference does that make to whether or not his son was blown up by a bomb? Your just trying to discredit a man who is standing up to terrorists.

by rooster Fri May 20, 2005 21:33

Ive never smeared that womans name and have referred to her killing as a war crime . One of her daughters is a personal friend .

-is there anyone in Northern Ireland who is not a personal friend, you claim to know everyone involved in every atrocity, seems your an unlucky person dude.

by eeekkkkk Fri May 20, 2005 21:38

"NO we have not found everyone involved
in that days bomb attack and we will continue to pursue them"

Rooster - who is the 'WE' you mention?

strange

by rooster Fri May 20, 2005 21:44

by cod Friday, May 20 2005, 1:47am
Rooster, where’d you get your law degree mate? To be writing with such apparent authority, you have very little actual knowledge or expertise.

-actual knowledge or expertise, dude, you don't even know me! How can you possibly comment on my experience, qualification or expertise? Now that is dim!



In reply to Rooster
by Barry Friday, May 20 2005, 1:34pm
Rooster, I know how the system works - explain why they won't allow the solicitors to have this so called evidence to have it looked at by an independent party

-fine barry, I will, as long as you tell me specifically which evidence you are refering to, can you do that?

by Barry Fri May 20, 2005 22:11

Could you answer this please ?

by rooster Fri May 20, 2005 23:26

But am not a cop.

by rooster Fri May 20, 2005 23:31

mmmmmm who have 'WE' here
by eeekkkkk Friday, May 20 2005, 8:38pm
Rooster - who is the 'WE' you mention?

the silent majority

by rooster Sat May 21, 2005 04:20

It is understood the date for this hearing had been set before it became known the Director of Public Prosecutions decided to prosecute him for the 29 murders.

by cod Sat May 21, 2005 05:49

Well you sure as hell aint a lawyer rooster.

"actual knowledge or expertise, dude, you don't even know me! How can you possibly comment on my experience, qualification or expertise? Now that is dim!"

Ah, dim-schmim Rooster, I've read enough to gather that you have little to no formal legal knowledge/training/expertise etc - perhaps any that you believe you have may have been garnered from television??? It's easy to pick someone who has an opinion such as you've stated but no actual knowledge or expertise with which to substantiate the opinion. I don't know what you do know Rooster, but I surely know what you don't!!!

by Al Sat May 21, 2005 12:33

Barry,
You usually handle yourself pretty well, I remember the last debate we had but I have to ask a few questions here. What has roosters occupation or address have to do with anything? you have never told us your address and I have never stated mine (and I dont intend to). Its nothing to do with the arguement.
Im not going to get directly involved in this debate because it is N.Ireland law which while similar does differ to the south but maybe instead of bullshitting each other and asking stupid questions you could actually state your cases with some proof?

Barry,
Im presuming evidence will be available to the defence, Im not aware of any country that allows evidence to be viewed by 'independent' parties during or before a trial unless it is for the purpose of expert opinions. Perhaps you should tell Rooster what evidence you are ferering to and what party you would like to view it? And for gods sake dont tell me its either IRA or SF because my friend they are neither independent or experts.

Rooster,
For the sake of credibility why dont you state where your knowledge/training and/or experience stems from? That goes for Barry too.

by barry Sat May 21, 2005 19:53

Ive asked Rooster whether or not hes a member of the PSNI for a number of valid reasons , none of them sinister .

He has made mention of the fact that "We havent caught them all .... we will persue these people " and such like, as well as "trust me, people have been gathering evidence behind the scenes " when talking about the inside details of PSNI investigations . He has also stated that "anyone who was ever issued a rifle or bulled on a pair of boots" knows PSNI procedure when dealing with the press .

These comments and the fact that in the past hes claimed to have been posting here while on night duty and being paid by the British taxpayer are grounds for suspecting hes a member of the crown forces . (notwithstanding sectarian and racist insults hes posted in the past as well as his defence of the orange order and justifying sectarian murders) In the past hes also claimed to know intimate details in the background of solicitor Rosemary Nelsons murder which could possibly explain his distaste for the Madden and Finucane firm also .

The fact that this thread is about a stitch up being carried out by those crown forces are reasonable grounds for asking him to declare any partisan bias .

I never at any time asked what his address was , simply where he was stationed . Again this was to see whether he had any inside knowledge of the case , as opposed to just media leaks or knowledge of Sean Hoey himself and the area hes from . These are perfectly reasonable questions given the nature of the debate .

By the way I should point out here that theres a small post entitled "in reply to Rooster " which carries my name that I didnt actually post . Quite strange that .

Leaving that aside , obviously the only independent people Im saying should have access to alleged "evidence" in this case are forensic experts . Why you think Id want the shinners anywhere near it is beyond me .

Absolutely nowhere have I claimed to have expert knowledge of the law (that strange little post has nothing to do with me and Im sure an Indymedia editor can verify that from an IP) . A poster named COD does seem to have though .
My limited legal knowledge only comes from the work Ive done on behalf of prisoners and reading up on their cases . The only other occasions where Ive campaigned or posted here claiming a man was being stitched up have been in the cases of

Colm Murphy - independent forensic tests conducted on his behalf proved numerous garda statements against him were fabrications and that he was fitted up .

Noel Abernethy - PSNI officers contaminated his clothing with firearms residue . They also tried to interfere with the workings of the official forensic laboratory to have him stitched up . This was uncovered by his diligent solicitor , not by the state .

Martin Brogan and Mark Carroll - arrested in a highly publicised case were yet again it turns out the PSNI and British army tampered with forensic evidence and interfered with the forensic labs to have it admitted in evidence .Again a million to one chance from a solicitor uncovered this .

Seamus Doherty- ditto

The state has been stitching people up without a doubt and theyre at it again wit h Sean Hoey .

It is very rare that a solicitor calls for international witnesses to attend a trial as observers . If a solicitor reckons his clients guilty he usually persuades him to accept a leeser plea .Corrigan firmly believes in his clients innocence and is fighting it all the way . Hes the expert , not me . And definitely not Rooster .

by imc editor Sat May 21, 2005 22:07

Hi barry - we don't log ip addresses unless the infrastructure/functionality of the site is being attacked.

Barry is a very common name. maybe you could add something distinctive to your 'handle' like for example 'barry from wee six' so we can deal with stuff like this as impersonation. This may be personation or may simply be another Barry.

If users are being impersonated and they have a problem with it they can get in touch with us though the 'contact' button at top of every page.

by Al Sun May 22, 2005 04:52

Good day Barry,
Been accused of being me lately? How does Garda Barry sound? Most of what you say I wont comment on because its between you and Rooster.
stations Barry? you should know better than that, he is hardly going to state that but I accept your reasoning for asking his profession.
I want to comment on is IRA and independent experts. I presumed IRA or SF because it is an IRA/RIRA/whatever man accused. Independent witnesses will obviously be used by both sides Barry, thats pretty obvious.
Lastly, your lack of clear legal knowledge shows Im afraid. the man pleads not the solicitor, he fights the case, thats all. In a case like this there is no way a plea of guilty is going to be entered, whats to gain? And I can tell you that telling the press in advance would be a very, very stupid thing to do. Arent cops supposed to hate having cameras watching them? Not too mention how many leaks could happen.

by cod Sun May 22, 2005 07:11

Al, although this discussion was between yourself and Barry, I feel I must interject on your last comment regarding legal knowledge. As I’ve read, Barry has not claimed to have any particular legal knowledge and I do hope this does not descend into a ‘peeing’ competition, but as you have corrected Barry, I thought I’d comment…

Your brief precis of criminal process regarding entering a plea is partially flawed. Yes, ultimately the accused is required to stand and speak his plea but it is far too simplistic and a naive comment to just state that “the man pleads not the solicitor, he fights the case, thats all.” As you should know Al, that is not all. The solicitor does not actually fight the case either. This is the job of the barrister/qc.

Very simply put, the solicitor would receive instructions from his client and provide preliminary advice to him on his reasonable prospects of success or otherwise, and would conduct any contentious dealings with the prosecution etc… on the client’s behalf. Based upon the instructions provided to the solicitor by the accused, the solicitor would recommend an appropriate plea, the timing of the plea (ie. including whether and at what stage any plea should be entered), and the effects of entering any sort of plea. Ultimately, the solicitor has to go with the accused's instructions though (or dump the client!).

There is far more to the process than just some dude jumping up with a ‘not guilty/guilty’ claim in court… Extensive weighing up of many issues, including the client’s instructions, any previous form, sentencing options, legal principles, the common law and any legislation relating to criminal law as well as discussions with the prosecution - would be canvassed/conducted by the solicitor prior to any plea being entered… [And not to forget Al, most importantly – whether the poor bastard has actually BEEN CHARGED!] This would all take a bit of to-ing and fro-ing, research and analysis prior to the commital or the arraignment or any plea, of course!

To secure a conviction, theorectically, the prosecution must able to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, Al, and on ALL of the charges.

To get this ball rolling though Al, there are those pesky issues of actually having charges formally laid against an accused (rather than innuendo and tainted comment through press leaks) and presention of the evidence to substantiate these charges. Once the charges have been laid, all details surrounding the charges and the evidence supporting them must be disclosed to the defence (ah, NOT to the media etc). The defence should receive every detail of the allegations, the manner in which the charges have been linked to the accused, the methods used to test any real evidence, the forensic facilities or personnel involved in the collection & testing etc... Obviously, then the defence would conduct its own investigations.

The evidence and prosecution version of events etc... must be able to stand up to scrutiny and testing by the defence to even pay lip service to compliance with basic legal rights and principles. However, this is all theoretical stuff remember Al. There is the presumption that these dealings will take place in a valid environment of impartiality and fairness - sadly, a presumption that has been often displaced in the past.

The other concern Al is that if the crown has had many years to 'gather' its evidence and allegedly test it out, the defence may also require an equal amount of time to scrutinise this chain of evidence allegedly linking the accused to a crime, the methods used to collect it and those other niggling bits and bobs that pop up - like in Colm Murphy's case, you know Al, evidence fabricated by the PSNI. All of this takes time - though what's the bet the defence will not be afforded such luxury. It also takes a vast amount of resources Al, which a simple man/woman who is accused will more than likely not have.

And Al, where is the accused during this time - he's effing-well locked up in an institution of the crown where he's treated like crud and denied basic human rights - let's remember Al - there's nothing proven so far... While he's locked up, he's also not able to provide adequate instructions to his solicitors (in a case of this size) or participate in his defence to the extent to which he should be permitted. He's not able to freely or spontaneously discuss any issues that come to mind in his defence with his lawyers, and he's not permitted the right to speak in his own defence at any time along the way.

And now Al, I'll be stepping off my soap box.

by Wedgy Sun May 22, 2005 11:46

Al said: 'And I can tell you that telling the press in advance would be a very, very stupid thing to do. Arent cops supposed to hate having cameras watching them? Not too mention how many leaks could happen.'

What about the raids on the SF ofices in Stormont? They had no hesitation leaking to the media in that case.


Rooster said: 'The man is helping the police with their enquiries, when they have finished gathering their evidence then he will be charged, until then quit your whining, if they dont have enough evidence for a conviction he will be released, OK?'

Like the Birmingham Six and Guildord Four Rooster?

by cod Mon May 23, 2005 01:43

The police often leak details to the media, that's part of the 'communication unit's' role...selectively chosen bits of course and only the details they want focussed upon.

Sheesh Al, I haven’t met a cop yet who took exception to looking the hero on camera. The only times that I’ve seen the lads (not being gender biased here but they have been lads) shy away from any publicity is when they’ve made little slip ups like, ah, leaving an audio etc running when giving a ‘person of interest’ or a ‘person helping with our inquiries’ a flogging… Terribly terribly shy then but otherwise – when it’s good them, media whores.

by rooster Mon May 23, 2005 14:14

Like the Birmingham Six and Guildord Four Rooster?

-wedgey, thats like thirty years ago mate, get over it, and those cases were investigated by a completely different police forces than the one this thread is about.
In fact, these unsafe convictions happened before I was born!!!!!

by rooster Mon May 23, 2005 14:28

It's easy to pick someone who has an opinion such as you've stated but no actual knowledge or expertise with which to substantiate the opinion. I don't know what you do know Rooster, but I surely know what you don't!!!


-I suppose its too much to ask for an example cod???
Your right I'm not a legal expert, but I don't claim to be, one thing I do know, it is neither legal or moral to pack a car with a tonne of home-made explosives, park it up in the middle of a town fete, knowing that when it explodes there will be thousands of civilians around the device.
And then when the police don't evacuate the area fast enough point the finger of blame at them!!!

by cod Mon May 23, 2005 14:41

Rooster, I’d have expected more from even you! What do you mean ‘get over it’?? What a silly comment. Yep, the Guilford Four were arrested about 30 years ago (1974) but they, along with the Maguire Seven, lost up to 14 years of their lives being locked up and subjected to systematic abuse by representatives of the crown for crimes they did NOT commit. You do not come out of that a healthy person!

Thirty years is a long time ago for a young Rooster, true. So why do you think it took a Brit pm so long to grow the ‘nads to apologise for the stitch up??? He only did this in February this year Rooster. The wounds are still very fresh – and how do you get over such an abomination of justice when the very same conduct is institutionalised and continues to be repeated? The illegitimate conduct of the police and investigators 30 years ago is still current procedure today, it’s just that they’ve got better at it from practise and technological advancements. Look no further than Colm Murphy’s case for a more recent example Rooster.

by cod Mon May 23, 2005 15:00

Rooster, I had every intention of providing examples as you'd requested but really, when I started at the top of this thread to grab the examples, the task is just too overwhelming. The examples, however, are all there. Perhaps read back over your posts and check out some of the creative reasoning you've used to support your theory about Sean Hoey. Nothing personal Rooster, purely a time/space constraint.

by Al Mon May 23, 2005 17:38

First to Cod,
Too long a post to quote from but to start, the solicitor does argue cases, barristers are used in higher courts, circuit etc etc. At district court I have never, I repeat never, faced a barrister. It has always been a solicitor.
As for dumping the client, you better have damn good reasons for doing that as you cant simple 'dump your client' once you have agreed to represent.
In relation to the timing etc of a plea. Everything you have stated is outside of the courts, I was speaking of the court proceedings. You want to speak about previous you wont be doing it in court until after he has either pleaded guilty or been found guilty and even then thats my job.
As for actually charging and providing evidence, statements, etc. Why such a long post? Why not just call it 'being served with the book of evidence', so much simpler.
Finally, you refer to the crown and PSNi. Im a Garda so I speak about southern Ireland. If you are speaking about Northern then I suggest we drop it as the systems will obviously differ. Other than that I will be happy to engage in a 'pissing contest' as you insult me by explaining such basic elements of the legal system which I am engaged with daily.

Wedgy,
Proof, if your going to make a claim provide proof or shut up and stop doing what it is your moaning about.

Cod,
Are you stupid or just ignorant? Define a 'leak' and then define 'press conference' and 'press release'. Its pretty bloody obvious that a planned raid to arrest a person thats supposed to be so powerful and has supposedly commited such terrible crimes would be very sensitive and any leak could easily leak to him. How stupid would it look turning up with such a presence and finding out that he pulled a runner 20 minutes before you got there because he knew you were coming? Especially on camera.

As for all the accusations etc about police. I would like to point out that you are all crying foul about the police accusing people without proof and the media following suite yet that is exactly what is happening here against the police. I have not once stated my opinion on innnocence or guilt of this man and I will show the same restraint when having frivolous allegations against police put to me.

by Barry Mon May 23, 2005 20:11

Al , "a planned raid against against someone thats supposed to be so powerful and has committed such terrible crimes ".

I think that says it all . Sean Hoey is neither powerful or has committed these terrible crimes . Sean Hoeys initial arrest WAS subject to a media circus . Reporters were there in droves to to see his arrest by 100s of crown forces and their large military show of strength . They all dutifully repeated what the PSNI told them "off the record" . This claimed that a man was arrested and was going to be charged with the Omagh bombing and that items had been seized which were being taken away for examination .

Yet he wasnt charged with the bombing or even anything to do with it . The alleged evidence the PSNI claimed to have for their charges was in fact eveyday electrical equipment that any electrician would have for his work .

This "evidence" was in clear view , unhidden in the back of his works van . As a man who was only arrested a few weeks previously and who lives only yards from a large military installation on Jonesboro mountain its highly unlikely that such a "dangerous person" would have bomb making eqipment just lying about the place in the open where anyone could see it .

In an earlier arrest operation only a few weeks before there were NO cameras or media and only a handful of crown forces . The very same items they took away in front of the cameras were in fact sitting there in plain view on that occasion as well . They werent taken away simply because there were no effing reporters there to see them do it !

They just had a good look round the place , saw what might be useful in a stitch up and came back a few weeks later . This time they brought a small army of 200 personnel as well as a media contingent around half that size . The fact that he was related to Colm Murphy was pointed out to the waiting media by the PSNI and highlighted by them as well .

The spurious nature of the trumped up charges against the man were on the verge of being exposed at his remand hearing and bail was considered near certain given his clean record as well .

Now almost 2 years after his arrest the PSNI yet again claim (anonymously to the media) to have made a huge breakthrough . This is identical to what they claimed at the time of Seans arrest but his defence would have shown this to be absolutely false . By anonymously leaking this to the media in advance they have again attempted to gloss over their lack of evidence and focus the public eye simply on Sean Hoey being a mass murderer .

Their timing of these additional charges , only days before the next remand hearing , and where the charges or alleged "evidence" themselves cant be examined is just another stunt .

The purpose of these stunts is not simply to stitch a man up but to avoid a much needed public enquiry into the Omagh bombing .

by Barry Mon May 23, 2005 20:46

http://archives.tcm.ie/downdemocrat/2003/12/09/story1418.asp

http://members.freespeech.org/irishpows/POWs/utv_abovesuspicion.htm

http://members.freespeech.org/irishpows/POWs/utv_abovesuspicion.htm

http://lark.phoblacht.net/mmtam.html

http://www.info-nordirland.de/new_417_e.htm

http://irelandsown.net/News24.html

Ach sure it just doesnt happen !

by Barry Mon May 23, 2005 20:59

http://humanrightsonline.net/omaghreport2.pdf

No enquiry need here , eh ?

by Barry Mon May 23, 2005 21:33

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland/Story/0,2763,637259,00.html

by rooster Mon May 23, 2005 22:03

The persons responsible for the Omagh bombing are the terrorists who
planned and executed the atrocity.
Nothing contained in this report should
detract from that clear and unequivocal fact.




-this was taken from your link on Nuala O'loans report, I think it sums up the case perfectly, the rest of your links, Irish POWS.com, sinnfein.com, an phoblact etc are hardly very reputable or unbiased sources.

Barry, what makes you so sure that Hoey is not involved in the Omagh bomb?
That is a simple question.

by habeas corpus Mon May 23, 2005 22:28

I say rooster old chap, whatever happened to innocent until PROVEN (not alleged) to be guilty ..... ? Or doesn´t that apply to Fenians ?

by rooster Mon May 23, 2005 22:33

Stating the obvious
by Barry Monday, May 23 2005, 7:11pm

Yet he wasnt charged with the bombing or even anything to do with it .

-he has now barry



The alleged evidence the PSNI claimed to have for their charges was in fact eveyday electrical equipment that any electrician would have for his work .

-hmmmm, I think if someone was making a bomb and especially the TPU they would use soldering irons, pliers, screwdrivers and these are the sort of things that an electrician would use.
Duuuhh!!, just because he ALSO uses these things for his work does not mean that he did'nt also use them for making the bomb. Small pieces of bomb fragment will be compared to these tools and a match ''may or may not'' be found.
What were you expecting the police to find? The B&Q build your own bomb kit? or maybe an ACME DIY guide to explosives?



The spurious nature of the trumped up charges against the man

-the charges have not been dismissed yet so how can you say they have been ''trumped up''



avoid a much needed public enquiry into the Omagh bombing .

-are you not satisfied with Nuala O'loans report, you seem to be happy enough to quote from it.

by rooster Mon May 23, 2005 22:39

A simple answer
by habeas corpus Monday, May 23 2005, 9:28pm
I say rooster old chap, whatever happened to innocent until PROVEN (not alleged) to be guilty ..... ? Or doesn´t that apply to Fenians ?

-can you please not use the term ''fenian'' as some members of the board will find this offensive.
Innocent until proven guilty has nothing to do with it, barry has stated that the man is ''definitley innocent'', I just want to know how he can be so certain of this.

by rooster Tue May 24, 2005 00:11

Ive asked Rooster whether or not hes a member of the PSNI for a number of valid reasons , none of them sinister

-you've asked me what I do, so what do you do Barry?

by Al Tue May 24, 2005 00:27

To be frank and honest Barry I simple dont believe you.
You will note that I said 'supposed' not 'is' a dangerous man. I seem to be the only one hear thats not made a decision on his innocence or guilt. Barry has already decided and so have a lot of users.
Im not saying anymore, Im fed up trying to explain the legal system to people who just use spin and biased information.

by habeas corpus Tue May 24, 2005 12:34

I am prepared to make some allowance for Barry's (alleged) "prejudices". The trial of the last person to be sent down in connection with Omagh (the Murphy fella) wasn't exactly the sort of thing to inspire confidence in "due process" .....

Of course that was the Free State Police and we all know that the PSNI are a much more professional crew .... (apart from a few completely unrepresentative rogue elements who have been implicated in the dispensing of "rough justice" to certain wayward "Fenian" solicitors and that sort of thing) .....

As Barry and others have pointed out there are a lot of unanswered questions about the role that covert intelligence and the PSNI have played in cases like Omagh (not to mention the Finucane and Nelson murders).
And let's be honest the Brits have a pretty good track record of stiching people up when they need a "culprit" - anyone remember Birmingham and Guilford.

Speaking for myself I have insufficient information on the matter to form any firm opinion as to whether Mr. Hoey is innocent or guilty of whatever charges may be levelled against him but if the PSNI really have a case against him then I just hope that they do a better job than their mates south of the border ...

by Al Tue May 24, 2005 16:24

"Of course that was the Free State Police and we all know that the PSNI are a much more professional crew"

Please back this up with reasons and proof. Besides the fact its different jurisdictions and therefore different laws.

by habeas corpus Tue May 24, 2005 19:52

Ahem that was just a wee ironic comment of mine but it's difficult to replicate a sarcastic tone of voice in plain text. I just didn't want our northern brethern to think that I was specifically prejudiced against the PSNI.

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to prosecutions in relation to "political" crimes (i.e. incidents that are in the public spotlight and thus "politically sensitive") I don't have much faith in any police force in any jurisdiction whether north or south of the border or outside of Erin's green (or orange depending on your persuasion) isle. The boys in uniform get instructions to stitch someone up and they do their best - look at the Guilford and Birmingham cases where completely innocent civilians were sent down for a long time because political expediency demanded that some "culprits" be found.

The Murphy trial south of the border in realtion to Omagh was not something that would inspire much faith in "due process" on the part of any neutral observer. As far as I am aware the court of appeal found that the police officers giving testimony (on which the prosecution was based) had perjured themselves. The key witness was an FBI-paid informer called Rupert with a very dubious track record.

It will be very interesting to see what kind of "evidence" will be produced against Mr. Hoey by the PSNI. Hopefully they will not be reduced to the same level as their colleagues south of the border.

Does anyone actually have any solid information about the "evidence" being used to support the prosecution ?
Will this be a jury trial or a "special" i.e. non-jury type of prosecution ?

by Barry Tue May 24, 2005 23:02

Senior members of the crown forces , including a British intelligence agent working out of Stormont and RUC/PSNI headquarters in Knock were part of the conspiracy to frame him .

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2002/01/20/story57787728.asp

They lied under oath repeatedly in Colms trial and were caught out falsifying evidence relating to Colms mobile phone . By tracing the chain of evidence in Colms trial his solicitor found it was a wider conspiracy . The 2 guards now charged with perjury seem to be just the fall guys . They could not have rewritten the false unsigned statements without retrieving them from the chain of evidence which itself involved assistance from higher up .

Now we have a relative of Colm being arrested by the same crown forces who attempted to stitch up his uncle . They come to his house one morning with about 20 personnel , arrest him and then release him . They come back a month later with 200 peronnel, including the SAS and an armoured convoy and a massive media throng just to watch them arrest him again ? Why ?

Despite telling the waiting media they had caught the Omagh bomber it later turned out after the press went away that NONE of the charges even related to Omagh . And it seems that these charges themselves wouldnt stand up to scrutiny in court .

Rooster and Al can say "they wouldnt bring the media " all they want but the fact is they did . And another poster has pointed out they did exactly the same thing in the Stormont raid when the media actually went in the door with them . That case has since been made a laughing stock of .

Sean Hoeys van was removed to Newry PSNI station , the very same PSNI station were the crown forces were caught out planting forensic evidence in the Carroll / Brogan case , Seans arrest and theirs only a few months apart . Newry and Mourne district council passed a motion condemning the PSNI and British army in that very barracks of systematic corruption and planting false evidence .

Seamus Doherty was also stitched up on that occasion with the PSNI claiming they had found his DNA on the bombs which their agent Byrne was driving about with . The crown was forced eventually to throw out Dohertys case too rather than reveal what went on . Hugh Orde himself was on the scene immediately after the initial arrests and that frame up wasnt just the work of a few rotten apples as the high level attempts to interfere with the forensics illustrate .

Are we to assume then that the PSNI only stitch up republican suspects in low profile cases , and not ones like Omagh where their ass has been in the fire for years now ?

Its clear that Colm Murphy was also stitched up, apparently with the direct assistance of senior British intelligence/PSNI figures who lied in a Dublin court and attempted to falsify evidence to back up the guards false case . The fact he was jailed anyway despite the farcical nature of the fabricated evidence was merely to assuage the justified anger of the Omagh relatives and sidestep calls for a much needed public enquiry .

Take for example the statement by Laurence Rushe, angrily accusing them of a cover up and a conspiracy by MI5 to detonate the bomb in Omagh

http://members.freespeech.org/irishpows/HISTORY/omagh_cover-up.htm

Because the fact is that one of their agents David Rupert , "suggested" Omagh as a bomb target in the first place . Just 24 hours after the massacre he was whisked out of the country by his mi5 handlers . He has ADMITTED this in court , under oath ,and disclosure of his personal e-mails to MI5 show this . Many more of these e-mails were witheld from the court but in the event of a public enquiry could prove devastating to the crown forces .

http://www.agentura.ru/english/press/digests/Central?id=20020211170400#3

Further more there is a witness , Kevin Fulton who claims he is prepared to testify as to the identity of a man he believes made the Omagh bomb itself . Yet RUC chief Ronnie Flanagan claimed this man was not a suspect and never will be ! Fulton not only told RUC special Branch a bomb was on the way but who was actually making it . He tape recorded a meeting with his handler where this was discussed .

Another anonymous caller TOLD RUC Special branch weeks in advance that there was to be a major attack in Omagh on August 15th, the very day of the bomb and yet no action was taken . In fact less than no action was taken , the large British Army contingent in this garrison town were confined to base, ensuring there would be no checkpoints anywhere to stop it . Officers were actually sent out of Omagh for the day .

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2001/12/09/story176420828.asp

It now turns out that this anonymous caller who warned the RUC of this attack was himself a Special Branch officer ! Does this not strike anyone as all being even a little odd and maybe after 7 years deserving of an enquiry ? especially given the huge loss of innocent life .

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland/Story/0,2763,1379578,00.html

http://cryptome.org/psni-omagh.htm

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2001/12/16/story265529728.asp

Laurence Rushe himself told the RUC that a man had been in the shop were his wife was killed a week previous to the bombing acting suspiciously and asking questions about the traffic patterns and the RUC . Layrence Rush claims he wasnt interviewed or even questioned about this which is extraordinary given the RUCs claims to the media they were doing everything possible to track the bombers down .

Importantly Rushes account also casts doubt on the official theory that the bomb had been abandoned there accidentally . If Rushe is telling the truth that the shop was the chosen target in the first place it would make sense that the seperate bomb warnings would say so . But as we now know the logbook containing the bomb warnings disappeared from the barracks shortly afterwards . Should there not be an enquiry into this too , and why an Omagh victim who had information like this was ignored ?

And as well we have a senior member of Garda Special branch who was authorising the supply of cars for these bomb attacks and who said "we'll let this one through" just before the bombing . Just like the agent who was supplying the cars , this MI5 trained branchman has since left the 26 county jurisdiction and isnt available for any questioning . Why have they disappeared ?

How can the PSNI case against Sean Hoey now 7 years later be taken seriously when the Omagh investigation itself was a total farce from the outset . It was virtually being wound up within 2 months , during which the only thing they managed to do was make the Omagh RUC station logbook ( which contained all intelligence warnings of attacks as well as the location of the 3 seperate bomb warnings on the day) disappear . As well as this they fabricated 357 seperate witness statements and other pieces of evidence . That was just in the first 2 months !!

And the whole time they were lying through their teeth to the media about what had happened and what was happening . But theyre not lying now, eh ?

How can forensic so-called evidence against Sean Hoey be taken seriously after it was exposed by O'Loan that the bomb car itself was forgotten about and just left lying for about 4 years under a tarpaulin in an open car park , exposed to the elements to rust and rot away ? Where it would still be to this day if OLoans team hadnt tracked it down . It took a lot of effort on her teams behalf to even track down the cars location in an RUC barrack carpark .

How can it be taken seriously after the RUC and British army have been caught out planting and falsifying forensic evidence in other cases around the time of Seans arrest , and in the very same barracks where Seans van and work tools were taken after his arrest .

How are we meant to take seriously the PSNI claim that hes the Omagh bomber 7 years later , when 2 days before the explosion one of their agents identified ANOTHER man as a bomb maker and yet theyve never arrested or questioned him, and have publicly stated they never will !!

How can the PSNIs evidence be taken seriously against Sean Hoey when they were caught out in a Dublin court falsifying evidence against his own uncle in the very same case ???? !!!

The PSNI and DPP have abused the entire legal process in Seans case just to scapegoat him and assuage the anger of Omaghs victims , identical to what they and the guards did to his uncle .

Just as Seans legal team have prepared a strong defence against the original charges , and Seans release on bail seems certain , they leak to the media at the last minute theres going to be an avalanche of further charges .

Theyve witheld these charges to the last minute deliberately , as the fact that Seans solicitor was talking to the DPP on the very same day the anonymous media leaks went out shows . The DPP made no mention of further charges at all to his team . This is an abuse of the legal process . As Peter Corrigan has pointed out its just another stunt to make Sean appear guilty in the public mind . Exactly the same as what was done to Colm Murphy .

In reality all theyve actually been doing for the past 2 years Sean has been in custody is stringing his defence team along . Its highly unlikely his defence team will now have enough time to have this new so called evidence, which has supposedly been in the PSNIs possession for 7 years, properly analysed by experts at this late stage in the proceedings . Not only the alleged evidence itself but the chain of people it passed through over the last 7 years and who had access to it has to be examined .

It could take years to back through the whole process, and given Seans length of time on remand already its highly unlikely the courts will allow them the time necessary to fully investigate these charges which have popped up so handily at the last minute . In effect its an attempt to railroad Sean and secure a conviction by abusing the process .

The PSNI and the British government are desperately trying to avoid a public enquiry into the whole rotten mess surrounding Omagh . By keeping Sean Hoey in the frame they can avoid an enquiry on the grounds a case is before the courts . They can silence criticism from Omaghs victims by claiming they have another scalp .

Neither Al or Rooster can truthfully claim the guards and PSNI dont plant and fabricate evidence on republican suspects , theyve been caught out doing it now in a string of cases just recently , a number of these cases at around the time of Seans arrest and even against another family member ..

They cant truthfully claim RUC evidence concerning Omagh hasnt been fabricated when the PSNI ombudsperson has determined 357 seperate pieces were fabricated in the first 2 months alone .

They cant truthfully claim there werent any agents involved in the Omagh bombing because now its been identified that there were a number both sides of the border .

If Rooster reckons the crown forces wouldnt ever send down an innocent man to prevent the role of their agents in mass murder being exposed , Id remind him of the case of the UDR 4 . If theyd deliberately stitch up their own personnel for over a decade to protect an agent whod slaughterd dozens of innocent people , protestant and catholic alike , what would they do to someone from South Armagh ? Or maybe he reckons the UDR 4 were just a bunch of lying whingers too ?

by rooster Wed May 25, 2005 00:38

Get yourself down to the Wellington Park and find yourself a girlfriend you extremist :-)

by rooster Wed May 25, 2005 00:41

''The persons responsible for the Omagh bombing are the terrorists who
planned and executed the atrocity.
Nothing contained in this report should
detract from that clear and unequivocal fact.''



-this was taken from your link on Nuala O'loans report, I think it sums up the case perfectly, the rest of your links, Irish POWS.com, sinnfein.com, an phoblact etc are hardly very reputable or unbiased sources.
Barry, what makes you so sure that Hoey is not involved in the Omagh bomb?
That is a simple question.



The alleged evidence the PSNI claimed to have for their charges was in fact eveyday electrical equipment that any electrician would have for his work .

-hmmmm, I think if someone was making a bomb and especially the TPU they would use soldering irons, pliers, screwdrivers and these are the sort of things that an electrician would use.
Duuuhh!!, just because he ALSO uses these things for his work does not mean that he did'nt also use them for making the bomb. Small pieces of bomb fragment will be compared to these tools and a match ''may or may not'' be found.
What were you expecting the police to find? The B&Q build your own bomb kit? or maybe an ACME DIY guide to explosives?



The spurious nature of the trumped up charges against the man

-the charges have not been dismissed yet so how can you say they have been ''trumped up''

by Al Wed May 25, 2005 00:43

Barry,
If theres one thing you cannot be accused of its losing the rag. I commend you for your stance and your ability to maintain a sensible debate however I must draw your attention to some of your reference material and ask you a question which may appear sinister but is not.

http://members.freespeech.org/irishpows/HISTORY/omagh_cover-up.htm This is an IRA sympathiser website based in the U.S. These people would claim that the IRA has never killed a single civilian and every prisoner was stsitched up if they could get away with it

http://www.agentura.ru/english/press/digests/Central?id=20020211170400#5 Im not really sure what this site is. It seems to be made to appear like an official Russian site but reads like a standard one-man 'black-ops theory' site.

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2001/12/09/story176420828.asp
http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2001/12/16/story265529728.asp These are both decent posts. I can semi-believe them (as much as I can believe any journalist).

Theres one problem with all this Barry. It was still the IRA that planted the bomb and it was still the IRA that killed those people. Maybe the RUC fucked up royally, maybe they allowed it to happen but that doesnt take away responsibility from the actual bombers. Someone did it, why not the man in custody? Also, lets remember that evidence from informers has been used on both sides. What is an informer? A person who sells his mates out to save his own ass. Thats hardly a reliable source and I could name dozens of cases thrown out based on that very fact.

Finally, you have the same name as the person that wrote the first article, is that coincidence?

by Barry Wed May 25, 2005 01:04

And I dont , thankfully , live anywhere near the Wellington Park which is full of druggies , cops and homos (actually thats all 3 rolled into one).

Some of the links you mention simply carried the original articles and video footage They themselves source IN FULL the original articles which were carried by mainstream media outlets .

The guardian online , the Sunday business Post , cryptome , the PSNI ombudsperson report , the BBC and UTV are NOT republican outlets yet youve selectively ignored every single one of them .

The best youve managed is one small 2 line selective quote from Nuala OLoan at the beginning of her statement . This was obviously made in advance of the predictable hysterical accusations which were levelled against her when she issued her report .

When Michael Mansfield QC asked simple basic questions of the RUC in the Omagh inquest he was accused of blaming the RUC instead of the bombers and having a suspect agenda . Its hardly surprising OLoan would seek to deflect such criticism of her report in advance . Like Mansfield OLoan in turn found a wall of silence and hostility .

And as you havent dealt with a single point or question Ive put in the entire thread its obvious youre just doing your usual trolling , sneering and utter shite talk . Thats ALL you ever do here , you dont debate or examine , just sneer at anything you dont like to hear .

Ill not be wasting anymore time answering your nonsense and shite talk . Ive posted here on a serious issue for serious reasons . Youre just slabbering as usual because youve nothing better to do .

Now Im off down to the pub for last orders and you can carry on doing whatever it is you do for whatever reason you do it . Its beyond me you waste of space .

by Barry Wed May 25, 2005 01:08

that last post was directed at that other bollocks , not you . At least you have alwaysengaged in sensible debate . Im choking for a pint now and Ill reply , to you that is .
not that other gobshite .

by rooster Wed May 25, 2005 01:45

you asked me if I was a cop and I answered the question, you asked me where I was stationed and I answered.
I asked you clear and concise questions and you ignored them, that proves that your arguement on this thread has been defeated.

by Barry Wednesday, May 25 2005, 12:04am
Now Im off down to the pub for last orders

At 1204AM that was posted so you have already missed last orders you fraud!!

by barry Wed May 25, 2005 02:47

And a very civilised place it is too , not paying much heed to Her Britaanic majestys licensing laws .ive had 2 pints , a spiced rum with ice and a medium sized cigar,

like you claim yourself I am also not a cop or a British soldier and neither am I stationed in a barracks .

Now that you have cunningly exposed me as an out and out fraud with your investigative technique which is on a par with the legendary and wily Sherlock Holmes , or, dare I say it , the redoubtable monsieur Poiroit (are you sure you arent a detective ?) I ADMIT TOTAL AND UTTER DEFEAT !! Your infinitely superior intellect , probing style of inquisition and thrusting , nay , incisive ,debating technique has left me foundering in the shallows of my own very fraudulence . The world can see this and I am deeply ashamed

I wasnt in the pub at all but really hiding behind the sofa in shame , red faced and tearful with a cushion over my head sobbing like a little girl .

oh the utter shame of it.

Exposed !! exposed !!,

Im finally exposed !!

by ROOSTER Sat May 28, 2005 16:13

media stunts vs public enquiry
by barry Saturday, May 7 2005, 12:04pm
Despite announcing at that time he was going to be charged in relation to Omagh NONE of the charges laid against him actually concerned Omagh .


''NONE of the charges laid against him actually concerned Omagh''

Man on Omagh murder charges
Names of 29 blast victims to be read out

26 May 2005
History was set to be made in an Ulster courtroom today when a south Armagh man was due to be charged with murdering 29 people in the Omagh bombing.

by habeas corpus Sat May 28, 2005 20:00

What is so breath-takingly unusual about a republican sympathiser being hauled before a Crown Court ?
And if Hoey really is innocent of the charges levelled against him in connection with Omagh it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a man unpopular with the authorities was stitched up for something he didn't do.

"History" will be made if and when some covert intelligence operatives and establishment elements have to answer for their actions over the last decades in relation to various "incidents", e.g. Dublin-Monaghan, Pat Finucance, Rosemary Nelson AND ..... yes ladies and gentlemen .... the Omagh bombing ........

But I'll not be holding my breath on that one ....

But rooster or ROOSTER was always a great man for the ould cock and bull story ....

by rooster Sun May 29, 2005 01:02

barry said Hoey was not being charged with any offences relating to the Omagh bombing, he's wrong and its not the first time for that.

by Barry Sun May 29, 2005 01:49

there were no charges relating to Omagh despite the world being told they had the bomber.

Now just as hes on the verge of being released on bail and successfully challenging the flimsy nature of the original charges we have this avalanche of further charges leaked to the media in advance . Another in a long line of media stunts by the crown forces.

Why are you even bothering . Youve talked nothing but mad dogs keek the entire thread . Me saying to Al I was away for a late drink is evidence of a conspiracy and shite like that .

Why am I even bothering replying to you

by Dude Sun May 29, 2005 02:07

Barry, I dont support the RIRA or 32 CSM or RSF or even the Provies, but I consider myself a strong Republican/Socialist in the vein of Connolly/Mellowes.

However, there are many points you make on this board that I agree with and many I totally disagree with. However, apart from your sometimes exaggerated and I have to say unsupported accusations about provies, I think your contributions to this board is top class. You try to debate the issues and not get personal or engage in scraping the bottomof the barrell with insults (not always mind you).

However, I personally hink you are wasting your own time even bothering to argue with either Rooster or Al who dont even try to engage in a proper debate of any sort. Even when I agree with Al, which is often enough, but not always, he diminishes his own arguments with some other stupid argument or comment that has no relevance to that going on. They should, but dont try to engage in proper debate and I think Barry that you would be better debating with those who are willing to engage you in a proper discussion of the various issues.

As I said at the start, I dont support 32csm, rsf, provies etc or inded the Free state or British Govts by the way, but I still consider myself a socialist/Republican. Hope you take this in the spirit it is intended.

by Barry Sun May 29, 2005 02:39

Youre quite right . Al can be intelligent enough and engages in debate .the other guy is a waste of space and there will be no further attempts at answering his nonsense from myself . Important points get lost in the middle of drivel and I should have more sense than to engage in it . I apologise to all sensible readers for losing my patience .

by habeas corpus Sun May 29, 2005 14:17

Sometimes your best contributions come when you blow your top ...
Nothing to beat an Ulsterman in his "war-spasm" like Cu Chulainn of old ....

by Al Sun May 29, 2005 16:40

I apologise if I appear to go off the rails but it is born out of frustration when my comments are met with smart remarks or personal attacks. the reason I am staying out of this one is simple because I have nothing more to contribute.

-Al

by rooster Sun May 29, 2005 18:25

by Barry
the other guy is a waste of space and there will be no further attempts at answering his nonsense from myself .

-ha ha ha, your just saying that because every time you have raised one of your points or examples I have shot you down in flames!!



Sometimes your best contributions come when you blow your top ...Nothing to beat an Ulsterman in his "war-spasm" like Cu Chulainn of old ....

-beautiful, ulsterman in his warspasm, I take it you count michael stone and billy wright in that category?
It always amazes me when republicans describe their own murderers as valiant gaelic freedom fighters attempting to repulse the evil imperialist war machineand then if someone else commits a killing they scream for amnesty international and their human rights!!

by Barry Mon May 30, 2005 06:44

you ever shoot me down

by rooster Mon May 30, 2005 07:22

I thought you were'nt going to answer back any more?
Caught out again Barry!

by habeas corpus Mon May 30, 2005 12:36

I'm not sure whether the late Mr. Wright would qualify for my pantheon of warrior heros.
He may have had some fantasies about himself as a latter-day Cu Chulainn defending Ulster from the advancing hordes of Fenianism and Popery. But from what I know about him a more realistic assessment of his career would be as a Brit intelligence asset who outlived his usefulness and got sacrificed as part of the Good Friday marketing plan.

I hear his oul fella is trying to have the matter investigated with about as much success as the relatives of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings.

Correct me if I'm wrong on that. I'm always glad to have an update on matters concerning the wee province from reliable sources such as mr. rooster (stifles a sarcastic snigger).

by rooster Fri Sep 02, 2005 16:19

South Armagh man Sean Hoey was today committed for trial for the murders of the 29 people killed in the Omagh bomb atrocity.

Belfast magistrate Desmond Perry decided this morning that, after hearing three days of preliminary evidence, there is sufficient evidence for 36-year-old Hoey to stand trial on 58 of 61 charges he was faced with.

The charges are linked to a Real IRA bombing campaign which was carried out in 1998 and included the bombing of Omagh in which 29 people and two unborn children were killed and hundreds injured.

The electrician, from Molly Road, Jonesborough, was remanded in custody to appear at Belfast Crown Court on a date yet to be decided.

Mr Perry said that he had been asked by the Crown to "look at the cumulative effect of a huge quantity of evidence that Hoey was definitely the man who manufactured 14 devices, the most devastating of which decimated the centre of Omagh resulting in the tragic death of 29 innocent people."

The magistrate pointed to evidence given by forensic experts throughout the committal proceedings relating to "significant" DNA and fibre findings which linked Hoey to the devices. Mr Perry dropped three charges relating to a device in Belfast.

"I am satisfied on all other charges that there is a case to answer," he concluded.

Hoey stood expressionless in the dock and said "no" when asked if he had anything to say.

Michael and Patsy Gallagher, whose son Aiden died in the August 15 atrocity, and Lawrence Rushe, who lost his wife Libby, were among those who packed into the public gallery to hear the decision that Hoey will face trial.

Speaking afterwards, Mr Gallagher said: "We are very relieved that we have now finally reached a point where a trial can start. However, this has been a long and difficult road to get here."

by Regular hack Fri Sep 02, 2005 18:15

Rooster. If you are going to copy_&_paste news items that someone else wrote, at least have the decency to give them credit.

by chekov - 1 of imc editorial Fri Sep 02, 2005 20:04

If you like, I can remove the piece, or amend it to credit the original author and publication. Let me know. We do not look kindly upon uncredited copy and pastes.

by rooster Fri Sep 02, 2005 23:12

Correct me if I'm wrong on that. I'm always glad to have an update on matters concerning the wee province from reliable sources such as mr. rooster (stifles a sarcastic snigger).

by small Sun Oct 09, 2005 00:59

Noel Abernethy was as guilty as sin ask any one in Dungannon,he has been involved in armed Republicanism since he was a teenager.

by rooster Sun Oct 09, 2005 01:23

I'm not sure whom you mean??