Daughter of Denis Donaldson demands public inquiry into killing after Adams case

South Wales Guardian

3 days ago

Mr Adams claimed a BBC Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Fein official Denis Donaldson, which he denies any involvement in.
On Friday, the jury found in his favour and awarded him 100,000 euro (£84,000) in damages.
Mr Donaldson was shot dead in Co Donegal in 2006, months after admitting his role as a police and MI5 agent over 20 years.
His daughter, Jane Donaldson, was prevented from giving evidence to the jury during the BBC's defence of the case.
Following the verdict, she said the case proves the need for an urgent public inquiry into the killing.
In a statement on behalf of the family, Ms Donaldson said: 'By reducing events which damaged our lives to a debate about damage to his reputation, the plaintiff has trivialised our family tragedy.
'Daddy's murder and surrounding circumstances devastated our family. The plaintiff prioritised his own financial and reputational interests over any regard for retraumatising my family.
'We are still no closer to the truth. No-one spoke for my family in court. We supported neither side in this case.'
Speaking after the verdict, Mr Adams said: 'I'm very mindful of the Donaldson family in the course of this long trial, and indeed of the victims' families who have had to watch all of this.
'I want to say that the (Irish) Justice Minister Jim O'Callaghan should meet the family of Denis Donaldson as quickly as possible, and that there's an onus on both governments and everyone else, and I include myself in this, to try and deal with these legacy issues as best that we can.'
However, Ms Donaldson criticised his legal team's approach to her evidence.
'Although the plaintiff claimed sympathy for my family, his legal team objected to me giving evidence to challenge the account of his witnesses.
'The jury heard sensitive, privileged family information tossed around without our consent, but did not hear my testimony.
'Limitless legal resources and vast expense were invested in this case while there is supposedly a live Garda investigation into my daddy's murder.
'The public interest can only now be fully served by some form of public inquiry, with a cross-border dimension which is ECHR Article 2-compliant, empowered to investigate the whole truth about the conspiracy to expose and murder my daddy.'
Ciaran Shiels, a solicitor who represented the family in the past, was called as a witness in the case.
Mr Shiels, a solicitor and partner at Madden and Finucane Solicitors, told the court the BBC was not only 'barking up the wrong tree' but was in the 'wrong orchard' over the claims against Mr Adams.
Mr Shiels said he represented Mr Donaldson and his family from a period before his death until a period after the broadcast.
He said he came to act as a spokesperson for the family after Mr Donaldson's death but said he no longer does so.
Mr Shiels told the court the family do not accept or believe in any way that Mr Adams had anything to do with it.
However, Ms Donaldson issued a statement after his appearance in court to say the family had not been consulted about him giving evidence in the case.
She said she wanted to make clear Mr Shiels no longer acts for the family.
In a voir dire hearing without the presence of the jury, Ms Donaldson said she had followed the case 'very closely and very painfully' over a number of weeks and felt compelled to contact the BBC because she felt there were inaccuracies presented as evidence in the case.
She said the family did not accept the claim of responsibility for the killing by the dissident republican group the Real IRA.
Ms Donaldson said her father had been 'thrown to the wolves' and there was a conspiracy to deliberately expose him as an agent.
She said it was the family's position that it had an 'open mind' in relation to the murder and it was focused on 'pursuing the truth'.
Ms Donaldson also said she had no idea that Mr Shiels was going to give evidence and she had not authorised it.
She said Madden and Finucane represented her family until February of this year but Mr Shiels was never appointed as a family spokesman.
She said the family were not aware of the first meeting between Mr Shiels and BBC Spotlight journalist Jennifer O'Leary about the programme, but were aware of subsequent meetings and other correspondence.
When questioned by Tom Hogan, SC, for Mr Adams, she also acknowledged her husband, Ciaran Kearney, was later present at a meeting involving the BBC and Mr Shiels at the firm's office.
She said she knew her husband was going to meet them and he told her about the meeting afterwards.
However, she stressed the family were not aware of the first meeting between Mr Shiels and Ms O'Leary.
Trial judge Alexander Owens intervened to say that was 'water under the bridge' for the second meeting.
Mr Hogan asked Ms Donaldson if she was aware of correspondence on behalf of the family responding to allegations about Mr Kearney.
Ms Donaldson said Mr Shiels was speaking on behalf of the family at that time in relation to the specifics of the programme.
Mr Hogan said Mr Shiels had told the court he no longer represented the family.
Ms Donaldson said the statement she had issued on Mr Shiels's relationship to the family was to contradict a newspaper report.
She also said she felt there was a narrative that the family were in support of one side over the other when they were not.
Judge Owens asked Ms Donaldson if Mr Shiels was speaking for the family on September 23, 2016 when he made representations to the media following a meeting with An Garda Siochana.
She said he was at that stage, and acknowledged he was authorised to put out statements for the family over the years.
Asked about Mr Shiels's evidence when he said the family would have told the programme they did not believe Mr Adams's authorised the killing, she said she did not recall discussing that in detail or discussing Mr Adams in particular.
She said their legal advice had been not to take part in the programme.
Judge Owens asked if Mr Shiels had been right in relation to their view at the time, adding it may not be 'either here or there'.
Ms Donaldson replied: 'I think it is neither here nor there.'
She added she cannot recall a conversation about that at the time, adding the family's position has evolved over the years.
Mr Hogan contended Ms Donaldson's comments had not borne out that Mr Shiels had provided a serious inaccuracy to the court.
He said he was in fact authorised to act as a spokesperson for the family at the time.
Paul Gallagher, SC, for the BBC, said it would be a 'fundamental unfairness' to not allow Ms Donaldson to comment on the evidence put forward by Mr Shiels.
Judge Owens said the Donaldsons were aware of Mr Shiels's actions from the second meeting onwards.
He told Ms Donaldson he appreciated all of her concerns and the points she made.
However, he said his concern was whether her evidence was relevant to the jury making decisions.
He said he had listened to counsel and her statements very carefully.
Judge Owens said: 'While you do have all of these concerns, I don't think your evidence in relation to the matter is going to assist the jury in arriving at their decision.'
He added: 'In no circumstances am I going to permit you to give evidence to the jury.'