Ploughshares Trial Report Days 6 & 7

national | anti-war / imperialism | news report Thursday November 03, 2005 02:12 by Court Reporter

4 defendants and 2 ex-military witnesses heard

Tuesday saw the continuation of Ciaron's testimony, and Damien Moran took the stand, to not only explain what he did and why, but at the request of the prosecutor, young Damo demonstrated the correct way to hold and use a hammer!
On Wednesday, 4 witnesses were in the stand. First, a retired RAF group captain gave expert testimony as to the effect that disrupting military supply lines has on a war effort. Then Jimmy Massey told the court about his time in Kuwait and Iraq as a US Marine Staff Sgt around the time of the action.
Karen Fallon spent 50 minutes in the stand telling it like it is, and Deirdre Clancy commenced her testimony, which continues tomorrow. Report based on our notes.

TUESDAY 1st November 2005
Circuit Court. Court 23
Four Courts.
Judge Donagh McDonagh Presiding.
DPP v Deirdre Clancy, Nuin Dunlop, Karen Fallon, Damien Moran, and Ciaron O'Reilly.
Part of the morning was taken up in legal argument and other matters in the absence of the jury, which cannot be reported at this time.

The jury were allowed in at 10:42 following a ruling by the judge on those matters.

Mr. Devally S.C. (prosecuting) asked Mr. O'Reilly about the planning period in the monastery, and whose idea it had been to bring the shrine items.
Mr. O'Reilly said it was agreed by the group, and he doesn't recall 2.5 years later who had most influence on that decision.

Mr. Devally asked Mr. O'Reilly if he was older than the others, which Mr. O'Reilly confirmed.

Mr. Devally: Would they consider you to be more experienced?

COR: You'd have to ask them. They're all very independent people

Mr. Devally : You're very modest, but surely you have an idea whether they think that you're more experienced or not.

COR: You'd have to ask them what they think.

In a series of questions, Mr. Devally then asked Mr. O'Reilly to confirm that Mr O'Reilly had spent time in various countries in Catholic Worker communities.
Ciaron confirmed that he had done so, and in reply to questions also confirmed that he had engaged in communities and actions in Australia, the US and the UK.

Mr. Devally went on to suggest that Mr. O'Reilly, being older, and more experienced, had been instrumental in deciding the form of the action, and gathering the items for it.
Mr. O'Reilly disagreed.
Mr. Devally asked if Ciaron could take credit for bringing any of the items in the shrine.
Mr. O'Reilly replied that after two and a half years, his recollection is not so clear as to who had brought which item.

Mr. Devally: Someone had a rucksack containing photos, hammers. They weren't new were they? You didn't buy them in a local hardware shop. Your group brought them

COR: Yes we did.

Mr. D: Was it your idea to build the shrine?

COR: I either suggested it, or agreed with a suggestion of someone else. It was by consensus.

Mr. D: You told the jury that you wouldn't have done this if you thought that there was no possibility to change people's hearts on the issue?

COR: that's correct.

Mr. D : It was part of the plan that these items would do that?

COR: It would provide the context and the spirit in which we acted.

Mr. D: Can I suggest that you put them there, knowing that the Garda Siochana would take them, and that they would provide a backdrop for the trial.

COR: That's not the reason.

In relation to gaining access to the airfield through a hole in the fence and into the SRS hangar, Mr. Devally put it to Mr. O'Reilly that he (O'Reilly) knew that he was not entitled to go in.

Mr. O'Reilly replied that he felt entitled to enter and act under international law, and the Nuremburg principles.
When asked about the hangar emergency door, Mr. O'Reilly said that he considered the situation to be an emergency.

Mr. Devally asked if Mr. O'Reilly had done similar acts before, which was confirmed.
Mr. O'Reilly also confirmed going over fences and other obstacles in other occassions.

Without mentioning the specifics of the actions, Mr. Devally asked if Mr. O'Reilly had felt motivated by a view that those previous acts were to "try to avert something hostile"

Mr. O'Reilly replied that this was correct, that in the first incident, there was a hostility which killed many people including children, and that the second was also to avoid the massacre of children.

When asked if he thought he had a lawful reason and if so why, Mr. O'Reilly said that he did believe that he had lawful reasons, and his belief was partly based on being in court in Liverpool in 1996 . Mr. Devally interrupted, but was objected to, and Mr. O'Reilly continued his answer.
Mr. O'Reilly described being in court in Liverpool at the trial of the women (Seeds of Hope Ploughshares) who disarmed Hawk jets that were to be sold to the Indonesian military for use in East Timor, which Indonesia was bombing at the time. Mr. O'Reilly informed the court that these women were acquitted by a jury as they were found to have lawful excuse.
Mr. O'Reilly also mentioned a case (involving some of the same women) who were acquitted after they damaged part of the Trident nuclear weapons system in Scotland, as the court in that instance ruled that the Trident Weapons system was itself illegal.
Mr. O'Reilly said that these verdicts had helped form his belief that damaging the US Navy jet was not a crime.

Mr. Devally asked if Mr. O'Reilly had personally been vindicated as acting lawfully for previous acts.

COR: Yes, on occassion I've been found guilty by the courts in other jurisdictions, but I still believe I was innocent.

Mr. D : So your view has not been upheld by the courts in your cases?

COR: Not yet...

Mr. D : You've been convicted in other jurisdictions for similar acts

COR: This is a different context. Ireland has a constituion in which articles 28 and 29 prohibited the US military use of Shannon for this war, and the specific legal situation here is different.

Mr. Devally put it to Mr. O'Reilly that he went prepared with these items to do the action and to go to trial with them.

Mr: O'Reilly replied that he knew that was a possibility, but had hoped also that it could have happened that the act would have sparked a wider resistance to the war.

When Mr. Devally put it to him that it was more than a possibility that they would go to trial, Mr. O'Reilly replied that on the night there had been many possibilities, including being shot by Gardai with Uzis or being arrested before getting to the plane.

When asked about his hope of changing peoples hearts, Mr. O'Reilly sais that because of his christian faith and knowledge of human nature, that he believed that it was always possible for people to change, but that often fear stood in the way, be it fear of losing their jobs or whatever, and that he had heard of and observed instances where police officers had, in similar situations, opted to change their ways and resist.

When asked if he was aware that the Irish Govt had given permission for the US military to use the airport, Mr. O'Reilly said that he understood that the Dail had not approved participation in the war, and the politicians were merely spinning on the issue. and that the govt position was unconstitutional.

Mr. Devally put it to Mr. O'Reilly that as he profoundly disagreed with the Irish government, that he had entered the airport to show his disagreement.

Mr. O'Reilly said that he entered and acted primarily out of a moral obligation to oppose total war.

There was a lot of repitition on this point where the prosecutor suggested that the act was one of protest, and the defendant repeatedly replied that the main reason was a moral obligation to oppose war and killing.

When asked if he had taken the law into his own hands, Mr. O'Reilly replied that he disabled a US Navy warplane that was part of the military machine that bombarded innocent people, that he acted to fulfil the law, the constitution, his christian faith and the Nuremberg Principles.

This was repeated about three times, and on the last occasion Mr.O'Reilly said that the Irish Govt had facilitated the war, but was not checking the planes.

Mr. Devally asked if Mr. O'Reilly had sought legal advice as well as seeking spiritual guidance in a monastery. Mr. O'Reilly said that he had not sought specific legal advice, but had informed himself and got photographs and information from Iraq, via Cathy Kelly who had been there with the group Voices In The Wilderness.

Mr. Nix, S.C (cross examining barrister, representing Karen Fallon) asked Ciaron a hypothetical question with a topical edge.
"If you knew that the state had legally placed children in an institution, where they were abused, would you do something to try help the children, even - even if they had been lawfully placed there?"

COR: Yes.

Mr. Nix then asked about the period of reflection and guidance in Glenstal Abbey before the action. Mr. O'Reilly explained that they were concerned about the situation, and sought spiritual guidance, and time to reflect.

When asked if the Catholic Workers were a religious order, Mr. O'Reilly said that they were faith-based, but not a religious order, rather the lived as lay people in communities trying to help the poor and oppose injustice.

When asked about the word 'prophecy' as in the prophecy of Isiah (to beat swords into ploughshares/plowshares) Mr. O'Reilly said that it connected the past present and future, as in when one sees large numbers of the US Military in desert camoflauge at Shannon Airport, then you know that they're going to a desert war.

Asked, about his paid work, Mr. O'Reilly told the court that he worked in a 'wet shelter' a homeless shelter that accepted people with alcohol problems who were thus not allowed into other 'dry' shelters and would be left on the streets.

Mr. Nix then asked if Mr. O'Reilly had complied with all his bail conditions, which he confirmed.

In relation to the Shrine, Mr. O'Reilly said that it was to remember the dead. he said that he had watched the tapes included in the shrine, including John Pilger's video "Paying the Price", and had been informed by them, as well as by reading the newspapers and watching the news, and was aware that even after the Iraqi army had been kicked out of Iraq, that the no-fly zones were regularly bombed by the US and UK military jets, and that civilian Iraqi infrastructure had been repeatedly bombed also.
He also said that he had seen former Asst Secretary General of the United Nations, Denis Halliday on that tape, and on the BBC, and on RTE, and had seen him at Shannon Airport two days before the disarmament action, and knew that Mr. Halliday had resigned from his position from the UN.
Mr. O'Reilly said that the frequent bombing raids after the official cease-fire had killed thousands of people, and at the time of the action in February 2003, there was a massive military build up, and he believed that war was imminent, and that there would be lots of 'collateral damage' which means lots of civilians being killed by the military being passed off as an 'unfortunate side effect', and that he feared indiscriminate killing of civilians.

Mr. Nix: What is the purpose of a shrine

COR: To remember the dead, whether in a car accident or whatever, in this case ours was specifically to commemorate those killed in Iraq.

When asked by Mr. Nix if he had heard of a place called Fallujah, and that the US military had bragged of levelling it to the ground, Mr. O'Reilly said that he had met people from Fallujah.

Mr. Nix. : In relation to the Trident trial you spoke of, the women were found innocent?

COR: Yes, the judge directed that they be found innocent.

Mr. Nix: Besides the shrine, there was also an inflatable hammer, what was that about?

COR: It's a symbol of popular Irish culture.

Mr. Nix : And a mattock, an agricultural implement, like a pick axe on one side, and like a plough on the other.

COR: It's a gardening tool

Mr. Nix : a hefty one. You would uproot a furze bush with one

Mr. O'Reilly said that it was symbolic and similar to a ploughshare.
There was a brief reference to the Catholic Worker founder Dorothy Day who is being considered for sainthood. [Didn't catch it all]

Mr. O' Higgins S.C [Cross examining barrister, representing Nuin Dunlop and Deirdre Clancy] asked about Mr. O'Reilly;'s motives.

Mr.O'Reilly confirmed that it was his motivation to protect life, people and property, and it was his honestly held belief that his action was an attempt to do that.
When asked if he had any working knowledge of the Geneva Convention, Mr. O'Reilly said that he was aware that it prohibited many things including the bombing of civilian areas, it gave legal protection to civilians in a time of war, as well as their property and the environment.

Mr. O'Higgins referred to an earlier statement of Mr. O'Reilly that Mr. O'Reilly was trying to stop a crime. Mr. O' Higgins asked what crime was referred to.
Mr. O'Reilly said that it was the bombing, and killing of civilians and the destruction of the social infrastructure, and that in his view the war was illegal, and irrespective of the illegality or otherwise of the war itself, the bombing of civilians and infrastructure was itself illegal, that his view had been informe dby the events of the previous 12 years, of bombardment, the deaths of many thousands of civilians, perhaps 50,000 killed by bombing directly including those who died of typhoid, cholera when water and sewage systems were bombed. He said he was aware that the US military was not on the ground in Iraq at the period, and that UN weapons inspectors were checking for WMD programmes, and that there were restrictions on Iraq's main export, -oil, under the oil for food programme, and sanctions that meant a lack of basic medicines, or capability to repair or maintain necessary infrastructure such as electricity and water.
He also said that he had been aware, prior to Feb 3rd 2003, of the Bush administration statements re: possible first strike use of nuclear weapons against Iraq, that this was not ruled out, and generally the US never does rule out the use.
Mr. O'Reilly said that throughout the 1990s the 'Coalition Forces' continued to bomb Iraq, in thousands of raids, and that there was an escalation of activity prior to the invasion by ground forces on 20th March 2003, as well as the rhetoric of 'Shock and Awe', advocating use of overwhelming firepower to create a quick collapse of Iraq.

The Judge asked Mr. O'Reilly why he hadn't gone through the courts.
Mr. O'Reilly replied that he was aware that other people had taken complaints to the Garda Siochana and that he thought that the Garda Siochana structure wasn't listening, he also said that there was a sense of urgency and courts moved slowly, and pointed to the fact that the courts had taken two and a half years to bring him to trial.

At 12:20 Damien Moran was called to the stand.
He gave details of being born in Galway, brought up in Offally, going to UCG to do a BA in English and Geography, and after that, working in a hotel to get money to either visit his Aunt, a nun in Rwanda or else go to Haiti. He decided to go to Haiti and spoke of his voluntary work, visiting hospitals, in that small poor country, before returning to Ireland in 2001 to do a H. Dip in UCD.
He said that after his experience in Haiti, he decided to train to be a Catholic Priest and joined the Holy Ghost Fathers seminery in Kimmage, and was enrolled there up until May 2003.

When asked of his awareness of events in Iraq, Mr. Moran said that he had helped to set up a small Amnesty International group in the seminary in Kimmage, and was involved in Pax Christi, and had also met an Iraqi doctor, Dr. Zahir Allihali in St. James' Hospital, and as result of speaking to him, had written letters to the Taoiseach and the Dept. of Foreign Affairs expressing shock at the sanctions and deaths in Iraq. The letter was entered as an exhibit.
The letter was read to the court, and it referred to expert opinions that the sanctions caused the deaths of thousands of children, about 150 per day, and was a violation of the UN Human Rights Charter. The letter also asked the Taoiseach and Ministers to take immediate action to try to end the sanctions, and stated that our failure to do so to date was a disgrace.

Mr. O Hanlon asked if the letter represented his honest beliefs, to which Mr. Moran replied that it was his honest belief that about 150 children per day died as a result of the sanctions and the destruction of civilian infrastructure.

Mr. Moran said that the shrine was to commemorate the dead, and reminded the court that it was (on Tuesday) All Soul's Day. He listed the items used in the shrine to commemorate the dead and the significance of each.
In relation to the tapes he said that he had watched them before going to Shannon, and that they showed effects of the sanctions and bombings, and showed Denis Halliday, an Irish man who had been Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, and head of the Oil for Food program, and had smuggled medicine in to Iraq to help children, in violation of the very sanctions he was supposed to uphold. Mr. Moran said that he had heard Mr. Halliday speak 2 days before the action at Shannon.

When asked why he had gone into the airport, Mr. Moran said that he had acted to save lives and property, to commemorate the dead, and ask forgiveness for their deaths, to disable a part of the war machine, an essential part of the logistics supplying the war.

When asked if he was aware of the presence of the aircraft, Mr. Moran said that he had seen it through a gap in the roller door of the hangar, and recognised from the markings that it was the same one that had been disarmed previously. He said that he jogged up to the plane and started to belt at the radome covering on the nose as he knew that if he damaged it, that the aircraft would be unable to fly.
When asked about the Garda Siochana present, Mr. Moran said that, as he was hammering he saw the Garda Sgt approach, asking the group to stop hitting the plane. Mr. Moran asked him to join in, and continued to disable the aircraft for about 5-7 minutes, before joining other defendants in a circle, placing the hammers outside.
He agreed with the Garda Sgt's statement that they presented no threat to the Garda.
Mr. O'Hanlon then referred to Mr. Moran's statement that he acted out of conscience to prevent a great crime at Shannon Airport, and asked the meaning.
Mr. Moran said that had seen military aircraft at Shannon, and on one occassion 150 troops in desert fatigues, and had made complaints to the Garda Siochana, which were not taken seriously. He said he had made complaints citing things such as the 1954 Defense Act, amongs others, and Minister Cowen had waived a lot of restrictions on foreign troops wearing uniforms and bringing weapons through Shannon.

Mr: O'Hanlon : At one point you made a statement that you looked forward to putting your case before a jury. Was that your purpose?

Damien Moran: No. I think if you look at the date of that statement it was on 21st March 2003, and I'd already been arrested. I told Det Sgt Houlihan that I had acted lawfully, with lawful excuse to defend life, uphold the law and I told him about the acquittal of the women in the Liverpool Trial.

Under further questioning, Mr. Moran said that it was his honestly held belief that his act was an attempt to save lives, and that he still holds that belief today. He rejected any suggestion that it was a publicity stunt, and pointed out that he had no control of the media, but he thought that he thought it would be a right of the Irish people to know why the act was done.

At 12:46 Mr. Devally S.C. began cross examination.
He asked about the groups time in Glenstal. Mr. Moran said that his uncle had been a monk there for 16 years. Mr. Moran said that before the action he had been to demonstrations at Shannon, including one where two US military flights were diverted to Prestwick, in early December.

Mr. Devally asked if it was in Mr. Moran's mind in Glenstal to do this action. Mr. Moran said that they didn't know if there would be a military jet there when the went in or not, but if they found one, that they would damage it.
Mr. Devally asked which hammer had been used and if Mr. Moran had purchased it.
Mr. Moran said that he used the red hammer and that he had not bought it, but had received it after seeing it at a peace conference, and that it had been used in the Liverpool Action, by the women who were acquitted.
Mr. Devally asked Mr. Moran to show the court what he had done with the hammer. [The hammer was handed to Mr. Moran]
Mr. Moran said that he didn't have an aircraft in the court-room to demonstrate on. The judge said that, at any rate, he shouldn't demonstrate with the same vigour and energy, lest it fly out of his hand and injure somebody.
Mr. Devally asked Mr. Moran to re-enact how he used the hammer.
Mr Moran replied "Well, rather simply, I held the hammer, like so by the handle, brought it back, and then forward 'bang' " accompanied with appropriate and rather obvious motions of using a hammer. There was some quiet laughter in court.

Mr. Devally: You subsequently described this act as non-violent?
Mr. Moran: Subsequently?
Mr. Devally: Yes, in the Statement of Faith
Mr. Moran: Yes.
Mr. Devally. You broke a door
Mr. Moran: Yes
Mr. Devally: You'd describe that as non-violent?
Mr. Moran: If I broke in to rob the place, it would be violent, but it's different. I broke in to get the plane.
Mr. Devally: So, it depends on the circumstances then?
Mr. Moran: Yes, very different circumstances, there had been 26,000 troops through Shannon in the 6 weeks prior to our action.

Mr. Devally then referred to the action of a woman a few days before this incident, and asked if Mr. Moran was aware that she had been arrested, and if Mr. Moran thought it was likely that he'd be arrested.

Mr. Moran said that he thought it was a possibility, that he'd hoped that the people at the airport might join in, but that he was prepared to be arrested, and offered no resistance to arrest.

Break for lunch 12.58 -14.05
After lunch Mr. Devally continued his cross examination of Mr. Moran.
Mr. Moran said that he had been at demos at Shannon Airport including in December 2002 and January 2003, and that these demos, like all the others, had been peaceful protests. When asked the purpose, he said that it was to voice opposition to the US military use of Shannon airport to maim and kill other people and be maimed or killed themselves.
Mr. Devally asked if it was Mr. Moran's intention to have his voice heard and thuse persuade others to change their stance.
Mr. Moran said that primarily his responsibility was for his own actions, and that he would describe the speaking out as inviting others to reflect rather than persuading them. He said that most of the people at the demos were already against the war and use of Shannon anyway, and that he had gone to the Garda Siochana to make complaints, and was aware of the Shannon Peace Camp which was monitoring and informing the public.
The prosecutor then made a long (and fairly unproductive) comparison to Woodquay protests, before asking if Mr. Moran was trying to make a positive contribution, to which Mr. Moran answered that he was trying to help with non-violent conflict resolution, to help people to see that "it doesn't have to be like this, with so many people killed, in an immoral and illegal way"

When asked if his action was to bring attention to the use of Shannon Airport in a way that he disagreed with, Mr. Moran said that this had already been done by others, such as the people at the Shannon Peace Camp.
When asked if his action was part of the effort to keep Shannon in the news, Mr. Moran said that he was unable to quantify any contribution that he may have had to that effect. He said that he had acted out of his "christian faith, obligations to his brothers and sisters" whether they be the people of Haiti, the homeless of Aungier St, the Iraqi people or the US soldiers, and that his primary motivation was not to draw attention to anything, but to save lives.

After more repitition of similar questions, Mr. Moran said that, yes, he did go to demonstrations at Shannon to help to draw attention to things. He then added that he also went to inform himself, as others, like Ed Horgan and Tim Hourigan had done, in their knowledge and exposure of covert things made overt.

There was then another short discussion as to describing the act, where Mr. Devally referred to it as damage, with Mr. Moran preferring to call it disabling the aircraft, and making it unable to fly.

Mr. Devally asked if the marches had been ineffective. Mr. Moran said that one of them had caused 2 US Military flights to be diverted, and that it had undermined the position of the US government, and had some effect media coverage, but with the language of shock and awe at the time, there was an impending sense of danger, added to by what he was told by Cathy Kelly whom he had met a week before the action. which caused him to reflect on what he should do.

Mr. Devally then referred to Mr. Moran's statement, made in custody that he had acted to save the life and property of himself and others. Mr Devally asked how Mr. Moran's act was to save the life of 'himself'

Mr. Moran replied that war can happen in any country, as subsequently demonstrated in London, Bali, and Madrid and that he was fearful that Shannon could be a target.

Mr. Devally: You were feaful that someone might target Shannon?
Mr. Moran: That fear remains
Mr. Devally: Did you fear that then, in Feb 2003?
Mr. Moran: Yes
Mr. Devally: Did you make it a target?
Mr. Moran: A target for seeds of peace.
Mr. Devally: You were fearful of a violent act?
Mr. Moran: Yes
Mr. Devally: Would it be legitimate it someone did?
Mr. Moran: It would not

14: 35 Brendan Nix S.C (counsel for co-defendant Karen Fallon) begins cross examination.
Mr. Nix : After your act of disarmament, were you surprised at the death and destruction?
Mr. Moran: I was not surprised at the deaths of 100,000 people
Mr. Nix: but were you shocked?
Mr. Moran: Yes.

Mr. Nix enquired about Mr. Moran's aunt, a nun living in Rwanda, and was told that she had briefly returned to Ireland at the time of the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, but is now back in Rwanda.
Mr. Nix asked about a relation in Glenstal, and was told that an uncle of Mr. Moran had been a monk in Glenstal for 16 years.
Mr. Nix asked about Mr. Moran's travel to Haiti and was told that it was at the request of Mr. Moran's former school princple, and nun.
Mr. Nix asked if Aristide was president of Haiti at the time of Mr. Moran's visit. Mr. Moran confirmed that, and that Aristide had been ousted in a US backed coup at that time.
Mr. Nix asked if Mr. Moran was aware of the previous dictators of Hait, "Papa Doc" Duvalier and "Baby Doc" Duvalier. Mr. Moran indicated that he was aware of those, but that there had been no US invasion to get rid of the Duvalier regimes.

14:38 Michael O'Higgins S.C (counsel for co-defendants Deirdre Clancy and Nuin Dunlop) begins cross examination.

Mr. O'Higgins: You were in court when we discussed the Geneva Conventions with the officer from Co. Clare. Did you have any understanding of it at the time of your act?

Mr. Moran: Yes, the Geneva Conventions were brought in after World War 1 and WW2, to protect rights of troops, and civilians and to set rules of engagement.

Mr. O'Higgins: It criminalises breaches of the convention does it not?
Mr. Moran: That was my understanding of it.
Mr. O'Higgins: Were you referring to protecting people from those crimes?
Mr. Moran: Yes. God forbid it should happen here.
Mr. O'Higgins: You referred to the awful attacks in Madrid, and London, of course those countries, Spain and the UK, were members of the coalition. The attacks happened at random times and places, and so an attack could happen here, but not necessarily at Shannon but on a bus in Dublin or a train in Galway, is that your point?
Mr. Moran: Yes. War is a form of terrorism, and Ireland contributed to it.
Mr. O'Higgins: And you feared that might be how you could be attacked personally
Mr. Moran: Yes.

14:42 Witness steps down. Jury is sent out. the rest of the day was spent in a long legal argument.