Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE WORD “NONSENSE” appears in Mr Justice Peter Charleton’s report on the allegations made by Garda Keith Harrison four times over the course of the 97-page report.
The judge forensically examines the evidence brought before the tribunal related to claims made by Harrison. He alleged that gardaí conspired with child and family agency Tusla to directly interfere in his family life in Donegal, as a result of his whistleblowing activities some years previously in Athlone.
Having sought the aid of politicians, with Labour’s Alan Kelly and independent Mick Wallace among those who had publicly supported him, Harrison’s case was included in the terms of reference for the tribunal, alongside Maurice McCabe.
He met with Minister Katherine Zappone at the beginning of the year, and outlined his case to her in the strongest terms – yet almost all of those claims were dismissed by Mr Justice Peter Charleton in tonight’s interim report.
In a statement in February, Harrison said: “The treatment of Sergeant McCabe and myself bear similarities.” He goes on to say that the “striking similarities” show that this “formed part of an orchestrated system and culture within senior management of An Garda Síochana”.
Mr Justice Charleton, however, disagreed. After 19 days of evidence, given in public at Dublin Castle, he found that the allegations made by Harrison and his partner Marisa Simms “simply collapsed”.
Background
Harrison’s case was that he was mistreated by gardaí, bullied by colleagues and, crucially, that the gardaí colluded with Tusla by coercing a statement from his partner Marisa Simms and directing social workers to visit their family home in Letterkenny.
The pair had an argument at the end of September 2013. Both Simms and Harrison told the tribunal that angry words were exchanged, and that it resulted in Simms leaving the house with her children.
A week later, Simms visited Letterkenny Garda Station and gave a statement to two gardaí about the incident. In that statement, she claimed that Harrison threatened her and members of her family.
She would later retract that statement before Christmas of that year.
Gardaí insisted to the tribunal that they followed proper procedures in dealing with the original complaint made by Simms and that they referred the matter to Tusla because the children were present when this argument took place.
A Tusla social worker visited the family on one occasion in February 2014, and recommended that no further action be taken. Harrison would describe this as “the ultimate invasion” into their family lives.
At the tribunal, however, both Harrison and Simms rolled back on their original claims that the social worker told them that she was directed to visit them after pressure from gardaí.
‘Nonsense’
The judge goes through Harrison’s and Simms’ claims very thoroughly.
In a number of instances, he is sharply critical of Harrison’s testimony in particular. He said that there were a number of instances where Harrison was involved in “tailoring his evidence to what suits his purpose at the time”.
One such instance is Harrison’s account of his relationship with Sergeant David Durkin.
Harrison said that a serious level of malice had built up towards him at Donegal Garda Station. Justice Charleton said that “he ascribes this to the oversight of Sergeant Durkin, saying that he would treat other gardaí differently to him and that ‘as the months went on there was always a hostile reception’ where he was discriminated against by not being offered overtime”.
The tribunal is satisfied that this is nonsense…. He [Durkin] was put in the unfortunate position of having Garda Keith Harrison under his command. He did absolutely nothing wrong and all of the allegations of Garda Keith Harrison are rejected.
‘Not reliable’
On the claims that Simms was coerced into giving her garda statement in October 2013, the judge was similarly dismissive.
He said that Inspector Goretti Sheridan and Sergeant Brigid McGowan, who took the statement from Simms, were accused of “distorting her words or putting words into her mouth, or changing her literal words with a view to making Garda Keith Harrison seem bad, or worse than he was”.
All of this was done, so they assert, for the purpose of undermining their family life. This is nonsense.
Instead, the judge said that the truth of the matter is borne out by text messages sent by Simms herself. He said that Simms “made a lengthy and frank statement of complaint about Garda Keith Harrison”.
“There is a regrettable tendency to exaggerate in her evidence,” he said. “Her evidence was not inherently reliable.
The allegations against two diligent garda officers by Marisa Simms are exploded by the relevant text communications between her and Garda Keith Harrison in the aftermath of his conduct on 28 September 2013. These make shocking reading.
Mr Justice Charleton said that, at this point, it was better to let the texts do the talking for him.
A week before she made the statement to the officers, Simms told Harrison by text: “U r so full of shit, u make me sick.. Love! U don’t know the meaning of the word… U have threatened me for the last time.”
Looking at the actions of the gardaí in investigating Simms’ complaint, the judge found that “there is no such evidence” that the garda authorities “acted maliciously”.
“They [the gardaí] did not create this situation,” he said. “The responsibility for that is clear.”
Death threats
Another aspect of Harrison’s testimony is that he felt intimidated by gardaí who would frequently pass by his home.
He outlined two separate occasions where an anonymous person rang into the local garda communications centre to say that they had overheard a plan to murder him.
Mr Justice Charleton said: “One of the allegations made by Garda Harrison during the hearing was that this was not taken seriously enough, though curiously in his statement to the tribunal he complains of garda activity near his residence.
This was designed to protect him. He regards it apparently as some form of harassment or intimidation. This is nonsense. The reality is that threats were reported.
“Because of the vulnerability of gardaí in the community, the threats were taken seriously and action was taken. The matter continued over several months to be discussed at high level. Garda Keith Harrison was put on indoor duties. He was less vulnerable in that position.”
‘Unfounded allegations’
Towards the end of the report, Mr Justice Charleton said that “despite the amount of time taken by Garda Keith Harrison at the tribunal hearings in pursuing these unfounded allegations, they can be dealt with concisely”.
“Firstly, it was right to treat the allegations of Marisa Simms seriously,” he said. “The plain reality is that serious action needed to be taken, and quickly.”
Secondly, it was appropriate to refer the allegations to the HSE… The relevant social workers had no doubt that these allegations were properly referred by the gardaí.
“Thirdly, the referral to the Garda Síochana Ombudsman Commission was not done in bad faith… This was not a case where serious risk of death had occurred through injury to Marisa Simms. That, however, does not mean that the referral was in bad faith or was done for the purpose of abusing power against Garda Keith Harrison.
To any objective person, the statement of Marisa Simms makes grim reading. She complains of a litany of abuse over some two years. It is possible for a reasonable person reading that statement to conclude that she must have been substantially harmed.
The judge’s language is even stronger on the question of whether there should have been a criminal investigation into Simms’ original allegations. It was decided at the time that there should not be.
Harrison had complained that there was a “malicious investigation to cause further upset to his family” – but the judge ruled that it was a legitimate matter for Garda watchdog body GSOC to investigate.
Harrison was not informed of the investigation because, at the time it was being done, he had entered into the confidential recipient process – the whistleblowing process whereby a garda can report corruption or malpractice within An Garda Síochána.
A senior garda told the tribunal that to have contacted Harrison at this stage may have “been seen as a form of harassment” or may have been seen as an effort to “hinder him or prevent him from engaging with the process”.
Charleton said:
It is an extraordinary irony that in consequence of kindness shown to Garda Keith Harrison and as a result of a conscious decision to enable him to make whatever complaints he wished to make that holding off on interviewing him is now to be blamed on the organisation which treated him humanely. This allegation is rejected.
‘Not the same’
As well as being very critical of both Harrison and Simms in his conclusions, the judge also had some tough words for Harrison in his recommendations at the end.
“Imposing and maintaining proper discipline is not the same as bullying or harassment,” he said.
An astonishing aspect of this section of the tribunal’s work has been the extent to which it has been regarded as tolerable by Garda Keith Harrison that he should be entitled to complain about his superior officers taking the view that… he should not be transferred to Letterkenny just because he wanted it for his own convenience… it was inappropriate to use the garda Pulse system to check up on an ex-girlfriend… when he fails to adhere to discipline, his commanding officers should be entitled to speak to him, remonstrate with him in strong terms and offer him advice.
He cited the example of when one of Harrison’s superiors found out that Simms and Harrison were in a relationship while he was stationed in Buncrana in 2011, and that he he had not informed them about it.
This would have been of great importance to colleagues there because Simms’ brother had been found guilty of the manslaughter of a garda who’d been stationed there in the recent past.
“Chief Superintendent Sheridan would have been perfectly entitled to have called him ‘underhanded’ and ‘deceitful’,” the judge said.
Instead, apparently, even in such serious issues as this, senior officers are expected to feel for the sensitivities of those who infringe discipline rather than thinking about the duty that the police forces owes to the country.
Looking to the future
Keith Harrison had insisted his case bore striking similarities to McCabe, but it is apparent that Mr Justice Peter Charleton thinks otherwise, having chosen to publish a report on Harrison’s case separately, before hearing the full witness accounts in relation to McCabe’s case.
The tribunal was set up in February of this year to investigate claims that members of the gardaí sought to discredit Sergeant Maurice McCabe because of complaints he made about members of the force.
“This is an entirely different matter,” the judge said at the close of his interim report.
There is no fact found in this part of the enquiry that has any impact on those matters that are listed in the terms of reference as raising public disquiet as to his [McCabe's] treatment.
The judge said that the tribunal would resume in January, starting with an examination of the O’Higgins Commission controversy (which almost brought down the government this week).
Alongside that, it will hear about a protected disclosure made by former garda press officer Superintendent David Taylor, who alleges that he was directed by former Commissioner Martin Callinan to smear McCabe in the press.
The tribunal will then wrap up by Easter 2018, the judge said.
“The tribunal again feels it necessary to earnestly ask for the help and cooperation of all those who can assist in getting to the truth behind all these matters of serious public disquiet,” he added.
Pending some sort of legal challenge by his solicitors, that’s the last time the tribunal will look at the case of Garda Keith Harrison.
‘Without validity’
Unequivocally, confidently, and often brutally, Mr Justice Charleton has dismissed the claims made by Garda Keith Harrison.
“All of the allegations… are entirely without validity,” he said.
With Martin Callinan, Nóirín O’Sullivan, Frances Fitzgerald and David Taylor set to give evidence to the Tribunal in the near future, the judge has set the tone with this report for how he will deal with claims set before him.
The government mantra over the last few weeks has been to let the tribunal get on with its work. After decisively dismissing Harrison’s claims, it will now do just that, starting 8 January 2018.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Progress of a kind…. I guess.
A spectacular climbdown.
It’s a city wide Oxygen
@Ronan: sesh is on!
Needs more along the Quays. Also need to remember to empty them, bins they have are usually overflowing.
@Rob: actually people do be bringing their rubbish bags from home and putting them in the public bins. That’s why most dart stations and bus stop bins have special guards on them to stop people
Great for providing the list of toilets!
About time. 8 of us in there last week and we had to leave a lot of rubbish behind. This should allow us to dispose of out waste responsibly this week.
@Tom Thumb: why did you have to leave it behind? Why couldn’t you have taken it with you to dispose of somewhere else? Annoying maybe, but there is a choice
@Tom Thumb: it behind?
Whilst more bins are welcome, I worry they’ll be abused, people will dump household waste into them, I hope I’m wrong
@JC: Empty pizza boxes stunk and we were using our bottles for urination. I’m sure you wouldn’t want us weeing in a doorway like animals and a taxi driver doesn’t want that kind of stuff in his car. We figured since we were leaving that,we may as well leave all the rubbish we could have taken given it all had to be cleaned up anyway. Just common sense really.
@Tom Thumb: you didn’t have to leave it behind, you choose to litter there’s a difference.
Nothing stopped you from bringing with you to a bin you could use or bringing home.
@Barry Somers: Calm down Barry. I’ve literally explained why we couldn’t take a lot of it and for the rest, you’re just arguing with common sense. Why don’t you care about taxi drivers rights to a clean car? You need to have a look at yourself.
@Tom Thumb: where did u bring it from ? Why couldn’t you carry it back. ?
@Barbara Coleman: Well what do my posts say Barbara?
@Barbara Coleman: Seriously?!
@Tom Thumb: Common sense, what is that? In my lexicon, common sense is opinion based on perception, not evidence. So, its would also have been common sense to bring it home. You know, fold up the boxes, bend up the cans, that sort of higher thinking.
@Tom Thumb: You need something like this for peeing, it’s unisex and leakproof as well!
@Tom Thumb: ah you’re just fiiilthy. You could easily have brought bags to carry your rubbish home. You’d no problem carrying all your booze with you in the first place, had you?
@JustMeHere: Yeah OK Mother Teresa. Let’s see how strong your sense of civic duty is after 15 bottles of Corona and 2 cans of Fat Frog. And the lack of respect for Taxi drivers on here is shocking. One of the lads was so drunk he p*ssed on the seat, but you think that driver deserved his car stunk out with other rubbish. Give your head a wobble.
@Steve Monk:
I hope me not allowing cookies will stop the ads for that appearing everywhere for me now :O
@Tom Thumb: Ah, I get it now, Thomas. You just want to annoy people, by posting outrageous comments. Very good. And all done from your Mother’s converted attic space. Well, I suppose now that your on your school holidays, you have to find something to do.
@Tom Thumb: your unbelievable! Why didn’t you take it with you? Lots of other places to deposit your litter. So now other people that may have seen you do this, will now think it’s ok to leave our rubbish behind. Your a great example!!!
@Sean O’Doherty: Well Sean, considering you’re either A)on the Internet policing litering, or B)interacting with a school child you don’t know….maybe you need to find something to do yourself pal :)
@Tom Thumb: Why couldn’t you have taken it with you?
@Tom Thumb: all your actions are because you drank in excess. All your considerations are the continent for you. You can buy the paid refuse bags and leave them by a collection point such as bins and depots. The some consideration you have towards the taxi drivers, the cleaning crew and staff of recycling and wastage plants deserve, urine into bottles is disgusting and contaminated other stuff. The bottles with your urine need to be emptied and washed by a person. The only difference with the taxi drivers is you don’t see them and you don’t hear them.
Next time take home your bottles with your urine, empty them in the toilet (wastage waters system) wash them and take them to the recycling centre.
There is one thing at the top of some bottles that when you turn them magically the liquid inside of the bottle stay inside.
@Tom Thumb: You should bring your fishing rod with you next time you go to the canal, looks like you caught a good few here.
@Alan Byrne: I’ll second that. Well played
@Steve Monk: “This item cannot be shipped to your selected delivery location ….”.
@Maria Quinn: Jaysis Maria, remind me to appoint somebody as head of logistics the next time we have a few gargles in town. Because obviously,heavily regulated fun is the best kind of fun.
@Tom Thumb: I also police grammar and spelling, so you need to be on your guard. Litering, indeed!
@Tom Thumb: Won’t somebody please think of the poor, put upon taxi drivers! If Tom doesn’t think of their rights, who will stand up for them?
@Tom Thumb: well you have a pretty well elaborated excuses. When the only thing you need is to carry a bin bag in any of your pockets.
For logistics I would have contacted my refuse provider and asked for provision of extra services, a tag for ” Summer in the Outdoors” and designed collection points and an app or messaging to prevent excessive bin bags or waste their time when there is no bin bags …
@Sean O’Doherty: Well I’ve bad news Sean,you need to hand in your gun and badge. In your first reply to me you said “its would also have been common sense”, I don’t need to point out your mistake there. And in another reply you said “your Mother’s converted attic space” ,you don’t capitalise “Mother” when it follows a possessive pronoun. :)
@Tom Thumb: So because you decided to go to town have 15 bottles of corona 2 cans of fat frog you think It gives you the right to act like a slob. Don’t blame the council or others for you and your mates decision to have a piss up.
Ever think of those who have to come along and handle your bottles of wee because you and your mates couldn’t act like adults.
@Tom Thumb: I really feel for you. Absolutely nothing wrong with what you did. It’s not as if you dumped your ru bbish into the sea or someone’s front garden. I really can’t believe some of the comments directed at you. Some people are just absolutely insane.
Are we in the suburbs not included? Rathmines, Terenure, Crumlin, Walkinstown???? Have you seen Ballyfermot in the mornings? Absolutly disgusting from all the rubbish left from the local take-a-ways and empty plastic pint containers from the take-a-way pints from the pubs. I’m sure there are places over on the northside that also need extra bins and loos.
@Brian Kelly: the jurisdiction of Dublin CITY Council does not extend to the suburbs so as useless as they are, you can’t really blame DCC this time.
@Kevin Collins: good point Kevin. So it’s SDCC that should be providing the extras to the suburbs.
@Brian Kelly: the cheek of you! Ballier is lovely.
@Kevin Collins: literally all the areas he mentioned are looked after by DCC.
@Talkingsense 2.0: I stand corrected. I thought the canals marked the boundary between city centre and suburbs but google tells me otherwise. I retract my defence of DCC so!
@Paul Whitehead: not at 06:15 in the morning it’s not. When all the rubbish is getting pulled around by the seagulls and crows. Discarded cardboard box’s still with chips in them and pizzas.
No respect for your country.thank Goodness you don’t live in Scandinavia your get arrested .
I think if groups are going to partake in large public gatherings against advice given and drink on the streets which is against the law, I doubt if these people will go in search and then queue for a toilet.
@Murph11: what’s against the law?
BYOBR
Bring Your Own Bog Roll
I’m still baffeled why there are no public urinals on the streets like London, you get much worse smell then cockles walking around the streets of Dublin, thanks to lack of toilets.
I suppose it’s to be welcomed. It’s a change from a few years ago when they knocked the public toilets in Ballsbridge. The ones on Stephen’s Green are chained shut and I think the Luas now runs over the old ones on College St.
It’s a very easy situation to manage. The council only needs to do what other councils of other EU countries has been done …. hire people to monitor and control the number of people in parks and squares as well as an online booking app for certain outdoors facilities.
There’s plenty of people in PUPs so they will only gained through work their state pandemic subsidiaries
They had to be shamed into it. Its not DCC’s city its our city. There is nowhere to sit and enjoy a coffee/pint ffs. Like everything in this country the people come second.
@padar: if only people came 2nd, feels like society is well down the the list of “priorities”
No respect for your country.thank Goodness you don’t live in Scandinavia your get arrested .
@Charles Shelly: in Scandinavia I can assume they have proper outdoor amenities and places that you can go and enjoy a coffee, a pint or a glass of wine without having to stand up in an uncontrolled environment for hours and urinate down a lane like an animal.
oh s!!t toilets will be overflowing after two hours
At long last. Dublin is the only capital city I have been that public toilets are not provided all over city. Can you please include the parks too? It is a shame to go to the parks in Dublin and try to find a bush to relieve ourselves.
Thank the Gods
I don’t know what to make of this situation, on one hand DCC appear to be saying that if they were to go around providing bins and public toilets people would keep using them.
There are genuine people, brought up correctly, who want to clean up after themselves and who’d be disgusted at the idea of going to the toilet at the side of the street. Then there are the ‘entitled’, who believe they’re descend from animals, can’t get to grips with bins and have a right to s**the in the streets. Thoughts?
@Arch Angel: your right. They’re still going to ruin it for everyone else. How hard is it to bring you rubbish home
About time! No bins anywhere! Walking miles to find a toilet! What century are we in. Hygiene and health and safety! Stop being so scabby Ireland.
You can see all of the these new portaloo locations on the https://www.dublintoilets.ie/ location map.
have your say