‘Big sensationalist expose' claim over Adams programme denied
A BBC editor has strongly rejected a view that a programme which aired a claim that Gerry Adams sanctioned the killing of a spy was a 'big sensationalist expose'.
During a libel trial in Dublin, Declan Doyle SC, acting for Mr Adams, put it to the witness that the programme's 'big reveal' was a false claim that Mr Adams had sanctioned the murder of Denis Donaldson.
BBC Spotlight editor Gwyneth Jones said that was 'absolutely not the case', adding: 'I don't accept that characterisation of it for one minute.'
'The tone was measured, the language was precise. There was so much care taken over this programme. It was a solid piece of journalism and the result of many months work and a lot of diligence and a lot of rigour and a lot of scrutiny,' she said.
The exchange came during the trial at the High Court in Dublin.
Mr Adams has claimed that the BBC Spotlight programme, as well as an accompanying online story, defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of Mr Donaldson.
He denies any involvement.
Mr Donaldson was shot dead in 2006, months after admitting he was a police and MI5 agent for 20 years.
In 2009, the Real IRA claimed responsibility for the killing, and the Spotlight programme was broadcast in September 2016 while a garda investigation into the matter was ongoing.
In the programme, an anonymous source identified as 'Martin', who says he was an informant for Special Branch within the IRA, claimed that the shooting was sanctioned by the political and military leadership of the IRA and that Mr Adams 'gives the final say'.
The BBC has said the claim was corroborated by five other sources.
Ms Jones had been deputy editor of the programme at the time of the broadcast in 2016.
She said Jeremy Adams, who had been editor of the programme in 2016, had since left the BBC, lived outside the jurisdiction and would not be giving evidence in the case.
Asked about the online article and why it had not been taken down, Ms Jones said she saw no reason to, and the BBC is standing by its journalism.
'It came from the programme which was a very solid, very well researched, well considered, much scrutinised piece of significant public interest journalism,' she said.
Earlier, BBC reporter Jennifer O'Leary rejected assertions that she had 'no regard or care' whether a claim that Mr Adams sanctioned the killing of a spy was true of false.
She said she did not treat the allegation 'recklessly', saying her journalism was carried out in 'good faith'.
Under cross examination by Mr Adams' barrister, Tom Hogan SC put it to Ms O'Leary that she did not make the allegation 'bona fide'.
Ms O'Leary said that her journalism was carried out in good faith.
'The allegation was checked in good faith and in the public interest,' she said.
Mr Hogan said the allegation was made by the reporter 'recklessly', adding that she had 'no regard or care if it was true of false'.
'I absolutely refute that assertion,' Ms O'Leary responded.
She also told the court that the allegation against Mr Adams was not a 'single source' allegation.
She said she took the allegation seriously and met with reliable sources who 'speak to it', and not republicans who had animosity towards Mr Adams.
The investigative journalist said she avoided people who she knew had some sort of history with Mr Adams, and those who would be biased in what they said.
'I was careful and responsible. Was I supposed to ignore the allegation? It was in the public interest that it was in the programme but only if it was stood up,' she added.
Mr Hogan put it to Ms O'Leary that she was 'just ticking boxes' when she was speaking to people about the allegation.
She replied: 'Mr Hogan, I am a professional journalist, I wasn't ticking boxes. I was doing my job in a professional way. It would be nothing without sources.'
However, Mr Hogan accused Ms O'Leary of setting about to find 'yes men' who would corroborate the allegation.
'That is not the case,' the reporter rebuked.
She was accused of disclosing the allegation only to 'disaffected' republicans and 'indiscreet' security people.
'No, that is a wrong representation of the sources. I spoke to republicans who support the peace process, and have no animosity. I wasn't going to any Tom, Dick or Harry to check the journalism.'
He went on to say that once she received the right of reply from Mr Adams, and 'having ticked the boxes', Ms O'Leary was able to publish 'in the knowledge you never had to stand over the allegation'.
She said: 'I don't agree with the premise of that question. I absolutely can stand over the journalism. The way it is represented, that we can kick back and put our feet on table. That is not the way I operate.
'This is investigative journalism, it is rigorous and you get the gift of time.'
Ms Jones, editor of Spotlight, also gave evidence on Thursday.
Ms Jones, who has known Ms O'Leary professionally for 13 years, was asked by defence barrister Eoin McCullough SC to describe her work.
Ms Jones said her BBC colleague is 'hard working, a grafter, very committed and passionate about her journalism'.
'She is someone who I think has a very good trait to be in investigative journalism, in that she will always play the devils advocate and she questions things.
'She is curious. Her work was to a very high standard.'
The trial continues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Ministers to unveil 10-year plan to overhaul UK's ‘crumbling' infrastructure
Ministers are to unveil their plan to overhaul infrastructure over the next decade as Rachel Reeves said the country's schools and hospitals have been 'left to crumble'. The Treasury has promised hundreds of billions over the next decade for projects such as roads, railways and homes. According to the Treasury, the document will lay out Government plans on prioritised policy areas such as upgrading transport networks, building new homes, modernising public services such as hospitals, and assisting the transition to green energy. Ministers are pledging that at least £725 billion will be spent on infrastructure over the next 10 years. Ms Reeves said: 'The British people voted for change – and this is how we deliver it. For too long, our infrastructure – our schools and hospitals, or our roads and bridges – have been left to crumble, holding back communities and stunting economic growth. 'This was a dereliction of duty by previous governments overseeing an era of managed decline, but it ends with this one. 'We are investing in Britain's future, brick by brick, road by road and track by track. 'The strategy will rebuild people's pride in their homes, while growing the economy and putting more money in people's pockets as we deliver our Plan for Change.' The Chancellor outlined a raft of infrastructure investment as part of last week's spending review. According to Wednesday's announcement, there will be £39 billion over the next 10 years to build affordable and social housing, and spending is due to reach £4 billion a year in 2029/30. There was also a £30 billion commitment to nuclear power, including £14.2 billion to build the Sizewell C plant in Suffolk and £2.5 billion in small modular reactors, as well as £15 billion for public transport projects in England's city regions and a four-year settlement for Transport for London worth £2.2 billion. Shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride said that the Chancellor is 'desperately trying to paper over the damage she's done to the public finances'. Sir Mel added: 'With inflation up, growth down, and unemployment rising, the economy is heading in one direction and that is backwards.'
Times
an hour ago
- Times
The disturbing truth I found at the ‘good craic' Ballymena riots
It was a gorgeous summer evening in Ballymena on Wednesday. The weather was warm, and as dusk fell and a pink moon rose, hundreds came out and mingled on the grassy bank above Bridge Street: there were old couples, young families, groups of girls in their skimpiest tops. There was a carnival feel in the air. They'd all come to watch the riot. This was civil disobedience as a social event. Old friends greeted each other before turning to comment on the action below. 'Ah, he's got a good arm there,' said a middle-aged man next to me as, 50 yards in front of us, one of an eddying mob of masked and hooded lads lobbed a brick towards the line of armoured police Land Rovers. The responding water cannon floated a welcome, cooling mist towards us on the breeze, and the crowd murmured appreciatively. A couple of minutes' walk from the water cannon, over on North Street, another mixed, chummy crowd is milling around outside a terrace which is thought to house immigrants. From somewhere in the middle, cobblestones fly: upper floor windows shatter, to cheers from onlookers. Then one goes through the downstairs window — and the crowd groans. 'Ah no, that's messy,' says the chatty, middle-aged woman next to me, who is live-streaming the event on TikTok for her friends. 'That's not right: there's local people living in there, you know. It's the upstairs windows they want,' she says with a smile. There was something strange and deeply unnerving about the riots in Ballymena. Yes, the spark that ignited them had a ghastly familiarity: on Monday, the charging of two 14-year-old Romanian-speaking boys for the alleged attempted rape of a teenage girl gave rise to a protest, which quickly turned into race-based violence. There were echoes of England's riots last summer in response to the Southport murders: the narrative — that vicious persecution and thuggery were a legitimate response to 'foreign' men attacking 'local' girls — was similar. But here, that spark fell on different ground. Northern Ireland is not northern England. They do riots differently here. They've had a lot more practice. 'This sort of violence has been normalised,' says Sian Mulholland, the local Alliance Party member of the legislative assembly (MLA) for North Antrim. 'Through social media, and emboldened by our political leadership, people feel it's OK.' There's also what she calls 'generational trauma': the long legacy of the Troubles, in which rioting became almost a rite of passage in Northern Ireland. 'People think it's a good craic. You hear them say it on their live-streams.' People do seem to be having a good craic. In fact, riots or not, people here smile a lot. Ballymena, population 31,000, is a strikingly friendly town. Everybody says so — including a woman I'll call Maria, a Romanian resident of Clonavon Road, the centre of last week's riots. 'They are really, really nice here,' she says when we chat on her doorstep on Thursday afternoon. A sales assistant, she has lived here happily for nine years, and says: 'Here is home for me, because I really love the people.' And yet she had spent the previous two nights bedded down at friends' houses to escape the mob, which had rampaged along her street, attacking houses thought to contain immigrants. Doors were smashed off hinges, homes trashed and set alight. One of her neighbours had slept in her car; others had fled back to Romania. 'They begged my husband to drive them to the airport. They were in a bad situation, with small children, and they screamed, 'Please take us, take us from here.' They will not come back.' So will she leave too? 'Tonight I will stay in my home,' she says defiantly, talking through tears. 'But after that, I don't know. I think maybe I will have to change my mind.' Under her feet, the worn doormat reads 'Home is where the heart is.' The unrest comes on the back of what a recent report to the Northern Ireland Assembly called 'an unprecedented wave of international migration', with 293,000 arrivals to the province of 1.9m people since the millennium. Net migration for this period is around 62,000. Across the border, where immigration hit a 17-year high in 2024, the Republic of Ireland has had outbreaks of violence too, with a wave of anti-migrant protests focused on asylum seekers' housing. The mixed martial arts fighter Conor McGregor became a figurehead for the attackers, and his language had a violent, nativist flavour: 'Ireland is on the cusp of losing its Irishness,' he said, describing rural towns as 'being overrun'. Just 100 yards long, Clonavon Road is a picture-perfect street of vintage, stone-built terraced houses: plonk them down in an English city and the hipsters would flood in. Here the area, and neighbouring Harryville, are the cheapest part of town, and low rents have meant a high concentration of poor migrants. Now, though, most intact windows display a Union Jack, or the red hand banner of Ulster, or pictures of the King and Queen, or Glasgow Rangers badges. Ballymena wears its staunch unionism on its sleeve — every lamppost on the long Antrim Road into town flies a Union Jack — and incomers and natives alike have seized on the symbols for protection. They're often displayed alongside a hastily printed sign reading 'Locals live here' or, in one case, 'I work in a care home'. So far, rioters have injured 41 police officers. But their real target is the migrants. Mulholland has a liaison role for a charity that provides interpreters for migrants, and has passed on their desperate pleas for help to the police. 'One family were upstairs and heard the crowd kicking in the door, then coming in the house. They managed to get up to the attic and hid there. They sent us a video which I passed to the police, who eventually got through the crowd and evacuated them. 'There were eight adults and three children up there. A family hiding in an attic. It has a familiar ring to it doesn't it? There was a famous book about that.' By day, most people in Ballymena condemn the rioting. In the quietly prosperous town centre, the most common adjective used by passers-by was 'ridiculous'. But it usually came with a qualifier. 'It's not doing any good,' said an elderly couple 'But, and we're not racist, there's an awful lot of, what do you say now … ethnic people, who hang around and make us feel uncomfortable.' At the Horse 'n' Jockey bar on Bryan Street, there was no equivocation. 'People have had enough and they're doing something about it,' said a man at the bar, to general agreement. 'They've taken over the kids' playpark and used it for prostitution.' When I ask who 'they' are, the answer is again unequivocal: 'It's the gypsies.' The word may be offensive, but it's one I hear a lot on the streets of Ballymena. The men in masks used it, laced with obscenities, as they hurled bricks. Maria used it, keen to stress that while Romanian, she was not a 'gypsy'. Local resentment has focused on the Roma community, relatively recent arrivals in Ballymena. The local MP, Jim Allister of Traditional Unionist Voice, singled them out in a statement: 'The influx of Roma, in particular, into Ballymena in recent years … has driven rapid demographic change,' he said. Mulholland is appalled: 'It's creating a hierarchy of migrants: 'The Poles and Filipinos are OK because they work; it's the Roma that are the problem.' For me, that's not OK.' In any case, the rioters don't seem too concerned about differentiating. In her tiny upstairs flat on Linenhall Street, Yelena Campo Reyes, 27, who came here from the Philippines last year to work in a meat processing factory, has also put a Union Jack across the window in the hope it will stop the stones. 'I saw a big fire outside,' she says. 'I thought it was just a bonfire but then suddenly the riot police came and this group started throwing bottles, stones, petrol at them. Then they attacked the car wash that is next door to us, where Romanians work, and they started throwing bricks at my window too.' She points at a crack in the glass. 'I was very scared. I understand the side of the locals that they don't want rapes. But you can't protect your community by destroying your community.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Return to the 1970s as Angela Rayner's law could see walkouts triggered by just 10% of workforce
was last night accused of delivering a 'strikers' charter' with new laws which would allow industrial action to be triggered with the support of just 10 per cent of the workforce. Business leaders and political opponents say the Employment Rights Bill, currently being debated in the Lords, should be dubbed the 'Unemployment Bill' because of the burden it will place on already struggling companies. Last week, economic growth figures showed that the UK economy shrank by 0.3 per cent in April, worse than the 0.1 per cent decline predicted. In spite of this – as well as firms warning they are being pushed to breaking point by the Chancellor's £25 billion National Insurance raid – Deputy Prime Minister Ms Rayner is pressing ahead with plans to give staff enhanced employment rights. Central to the plans will be the repeal of Tory trade union laws which will reduce the threshold for strike action and make union funding of the Labour Party automatic – with an 'opt-in' provision – rather than optional. It is likely to see a return to the industrial unrest of the 1970s when strikes could be triggered by a small number of activists. Labour's own analysis says the Bill will cost businesses £4.5 billion a year, l ead to the loss of 50,000 jobs and increase prices in the shops. Union chiefs will also be given a legal right to enter any workplace to recruit and organise, while the 40 per cent vote threshold for union recognition could be slashed to just 2 per cent of staff. The laws pave the way for ministers to decree only one in 50 workers in a bargaining unit negotiating with employers would need to support a union in order for a formal process to start. When combined with the expected abolition of the 50 per cent turnout rule for a strike ballot, the Tories say action could be triggered by as few as one in ten workers. It means that, for example, in an office of 1,000 people, just nine employees could vote – and only five votes in favour – for a strike to be called. The Bill also includes an end to zero hours contracts; the right to unfair dismissal from the first day; strengthened collective redundancy rights; enhanced sick pay; stronger tipping rights; more family-friendly rights, and extra parental and bereavement leave rights. Shadow Business Secretary Andrew Griffith said: 'This Bill should be renamed the 'Unemployment Bill', because that is exactly what it will do. 'Unions will grind the country to a halt, causing havoc with strikes supported by just 10 per cent of the workforce. This is nothing but an extreme union charter that Rayner hopes will take us back to the 1970s. Once again, Labour are putting party first country second – and the grubby quid pro quo at the heart of the deal proves it.' Jonny Haseldine, head of business environment at the British Chambers of Commerce said the legislation 'does not strike the right balance' and provisions in the Bill would be 'deeply worrying for employers'. Mr Haseldine said: 'There's a high risk of consequences that could limit employment opportunities and economic growth. 'The Government needs to help businesses innovate and be more productive. By adding more restrictions the Bill jeopardises all of this – creating a lose-lose scenario for everyone.' He added: 'Planned changes to dismissal rules and trade union ballot thresholds, for example, are some of the critical areas that need to be revisited.' A government spokesman said: 'The old strike laws clearly didn't work, with the UK losing more days to industrial action than any year since the 1980s. Our Employment Rights Bill is fundamental to delivering our Plan for Change.'
