Why wasn't McGuinness arrested?

PomBear

If Vincent Browne's library, Pat Byrne, Gay Mitchell etc. are so certain of McGuinness' IRA membership post-1974, why wasn't McGuinness arrested if their sources and evidence are so strong?

Methinks it's a case of pure journalistic hearsay and frankly, very poor show by Gay Mitchell and co. when they make this accusation and propose it as fact, libelous really...

jimmycrackcorm

Burden of proof.

maygitchell

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Burden of proof.

Lack thereof i would have thought?

Liam Byrne

In the Jerry McCabe case they couldn't get the witness who could prove it was a planned murder to testify and had to settle for a manslaughter charge.

So the same could be the case with McGuinness.......I mean, if his organisation went around kneecapping and "disappearing" people, who do you think would testify ?

blahfckingblah

but they don't liam, and he has been charged before. If the level of involvement and evidence is there then surely something would be tracable back to him???

foggy_lad

Honestly who would even want to sit or stand next to a man of violence like mcGuinness? He was very high up in the IRA up to recent times and has lied througghout about this and other issues.

He arranged for people to be shot blown apart etc for years and now we are supposed to say all is forgiven Martin? Especially considering the man can't accept even now that the republic he wants to represent is 26 counties and not 32.

Pompey Magnus

They would be silly to have him arrested, it would mean they would be forced to show their hand and reveal the bluff. It is much more sensible for them to keep making their insinuations come an election knowing there are plenty of people more than willing to accept it readily.

The minor benefit they would gain from the images of McGuinness being arrested and led into a Garda station would not equal the major boost SF would get when he is seen walking out a free man.

PomBear

foggy_lad wrote: »

Honestly who would even want to sit or stand next to a man of violence like mcGuinness? He was very high up in the IRA up to recent times and has lied througghout about this and other issues.

He arranged for people to be shot blown apart etc for years and now we are supposed to say all is forgiven Martin? Especially considering the man can't accept even now that the republic he wants to represent is 26 counties and not 32.

I think you are proof of the example in the OP.....

blahfckingblah

foggy_lad wrote: »

Honestly who would even want to sit or stand next to a man of violence like mcGuinness? He was very high up in the IRA up to recent times and has lied througghout about this and other issues.

You should provide the evidence you have to the Gardai maybe then with the "evidence" they have they can prosecute him, that is of course if there is any??

Pride Fighter

PomBear wrote: »

If Vincent Browne's library, Pat Byrne, Gay Mitchell etc. are so certain of McGuinness' IRA membership post-1974, why wasn't McGuinness arrested if their sources and evidence are so strong?

Methinks it's a case of pure journalistic hearsay and frankly, very poor show by Gay Mitchell and co. when they make this accusation and propose it as fact, libelous really...

There is exemptions for members of Paramilitaries under the Good Friday agreement, that's why.

Even the dogs on the street know MMG was in the IRA. He's admitted it himself. I'll still give him a high preference, a 2 or a 3, cause he is on the path of peace now. Everyone makes mistakes and deserves a second chance. He is also Deputy 1st Minister of NI and is a very experienced politician.

foggy_lad

PomBear wrote: »

I think you are proof of the example in the OP.....

If it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck and all your closest friends and neighbours tell you how much they admire your duck then it is a duck, you don't need DNA analysis Or further proof to confirm!

niallers1

RUC/Gardai/MI5

Surely between them they could have rustled up some evidence..

It's all hearsay, rumour and conjecture untiil proven....

I believe in this country your are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

LuckyLloyd

They never had a case that would stand up in court.

PomBear

foggy_lad wrote: »

If it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck and all your closest friends and neighbours tell you how much they admire your duck then it is a duck, you don't need DNA analysis Or further proof to confirm!

Yes because the British police forces is known for the idelogy of "As long as society knows they've committed crimes, we don't have to put them in jail"

niallers1

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

They never had a case that would stand up in court.

They could have called widgery off the bench or Justice Donaldson..lack of evidence wouldn't have been an issue for them.

PomBear

Pride Fighter wrote: »

There is exemptions for members of Paramilitaries under the Good Friday agreement, that's why.

Even the dogs on the street know MMG was in the IRA. He's admitted it himself. I'll still give him a high preference, a 2 or a 3, cause he is on the path of peace now. Everyone makes mistakes and deserves a second chance. He is also Deputy 1st Minister of NI and is a very experienced politician.

But what i'm asking is why he wasn't arrested between 1974-1997? 23 years in which these people are alleging he was in the IRA yet policing forces who hated the IRA didn't arrest him?

Capt'n Midnight

If he is innocent then why hasn't he sued for liable, defamation or slander ?

You'd think he could do with the money since he is frequently putting on the poor mouth about how little his income is.

And one win in a court could silence his critics.


Albert Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others

Reynolds was awarded 1p in damages

realdanbreen

McGuinness has said that while in the IRA he never killed anyone or ordered anyone to be killed. If that is the case then he wasn't a very successful IRA man or OTOH, he might be lying!

Wide Road

realdanbreen wrote: »

McGuinness has said that while in the IRA he never killed anyone or ordered anyone to be killed. If that is the case then he wasn't a very successful IRA man or OTOH, he might be lying!

OTOH?
What does it mean?

foggy_lad

PomBear wrote: »

But what i'm asking is why he wasn't arrested between 1974-1997? 23 years in which these people are alleging he was in the IRA yet policing forces who hated the IRA didn't arrest him?

There was not enough evidence to convict. The whole world knew he was a Terrorist but unless the attendance book for Derry IRA meetings was found and deciphered and the bauld Martin was found to be marked "anseo" he could not be convicted although known publicly to be guilty!

Sunnyisland

foggy_lad wrote: »

There was not enough evidence to convict. The whole world knew he was a Terrorist but unless the attendance book for Derry IRA meetings was found and deciphered and the bald Martin was found to be marked "anseo" he could not be convicted although known publicly to be guilty!

To be convicted of IRA membership all one needed was the sworn word of a superintendent in the garda and you be whisked away to the special criminal court in green st and then unto portlaoise jail.

And in the north British intelligence could make up any notebooks they wanted to. And why didn't raymond gilmore one of the first supergrasses get him arrested in 1982 ?

realdanbreen

niallers1 wrote: »

RUC/Gardai/MI5

Surely between them they could have rustled up some evidence..

It's all hearsay, rumour and conjecture untiil proven....

I believe in this country your are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

There were allegations a couple of years ago that McGuinness was an informer.

PomBear

foggy_lad wrote: »

There was not enough evidence to convict. The whole world knew he was a Terrorist but unless the attendance book for Derry IRA meetings was found and deciphered and the bauld Martin was found to be marked "anseo" he could not be convicted although known publicly to be guilty!

In a time where there was internment without trial and times of faulted evidence of the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four. You're telling me they had to have evidence as strong as an attendance book?

And on that point, if there was not enough evidence to even bring him to trial, you're saying there is enough astute evidence to say for certain McGuinness was in the IRA post-1974? Well MI5 should have recruited you quickly because you and Gay Mitchell clearly have more evidence than they did.

PomBear

Wide Road wrote: »

OTOH?
What does it mean?

On the other hand

foggy_lad

realies wrote: »

To be convicted of IRA membership all one needed was the sworn word of a superintendent in the garda and you be whisked away to the special criminal court in green st and then unto portlaoise jail.

And in the north British intelligence could make up any notebooks they wanted to. And why didn't raymond gilmore one of the first supergrasses get him arrested in 1982 ?

That sworn statement of a superintendent was only brought in more recently and was not available throughout most of the troubles.

And the English had to have something rock solid or he would just become the greatest martyr/hero of the whole conflict

KeithAFC

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If he is innocent then why hasn't he sued for liable, defamation or slander ?

You'd think he could do with the money since he is frequently putting on the poor mouth about how little his income is.

And one win in a court could silence his critics.


Albert Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others

Reynolds was awarded 1p in damages

He isn't innocent. That is why he hasn't sued.

audi a4 2008

realdanbreen wrote: »

There were allegations a couple of years ago that McGuinness was an informer.

british propaganda at work.

Sunnyisland

foggy_lad wrote: »

That sworn statement of a superintendent was only brought in more recently and was not available throughout most of the troubles.

And the English had to have something rock solid or he would just become the greatest martyr/hero of the whole conflict

1 Beg to differ there it was used throughout the 70s & 80s in the south,

2 Are you joking MMg would have been a top target for assassination or imprisonment and he was/is alreday a hero in derry and well repected throughout the nationalist community.

Wide Road

KeithAFC wrote: »

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If he is innocent then why hasn't he sued for liable, defamation or slander ?

You'd think he could do with the money since he is frequently putting on the poor mouth about how little his income is.

And one win in a court could silence his critics.


Albert Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others

Reynolds was awarded 1p in damages

He isn't innocent. That is why he hasn't sued.

Kathleen Lynch's husband has not sued.
Keith, do you think he is innocent?

realdanbreen

audi a4 2008 wrote: »

british propaganda at work.

But the allegations were made by republicans!

foggy_lad

realies wrote: »

1 Beg to differ there it was used throughout the 70s & 80s in the south,.

my mistake, I was thinking of much more recent law regarding membership of criminal gangs here in the 26 counties of Ireland.

audi a4 2008

realdanbreen wrote: »

But the allegations were made by republicans!

no sorry to say they were not made by republicans.
this goes back to two men (1)frank hegarty (2)martin ingram this is a false name but is well know person he was a warrent officer.
anyway look the story is two long to go into it,but for me martin mcguinness loves ireland and would never take the queens pay.

Wide Road

foggy_lad wrote: »

realies wrote: »

1 Beg to differ there it was used throughout the 70s & 80s in the south,.

my mistake, I was thinking of much more recent law regarding membership of criminal gangs here in the 26 counties of Ireland.

Would Kathleen Lynch's husband qualify?

K-9

Mi5 source maybe?

realdanbreen

audi a4 2008 wrote: »

no sorry to say they were not made by republicans.
this goes back to two men (1)frank hegarty (2)martin ingram this is a false name but is well know person he was a warrent officer.
anyway look the story is two long to go into it,but for me martin mcguinness loves ireland and would never take the queens pay.

They said the same about his buddy Denis Donaldson.

audi a4 2008

realdanbreen wrote: »

They said the same about his buddy Denis Donaldson.

oh man can we stick with this tread ha ha:D,if we open that can of worms ill get no sleep

K-9

Wide Road wrote: »

Would Kathleen Lynch's husband qualify?

Will you just spit out what you have insinuated for a few posts and get it over with.

Just get over the "have you stopped beating your wife yet bit?".

foggy_lad

audi a4 2008 wrote: »

no sorry to say they were not made by republicans.
this goes back to two men (1)frank hegarty (2)martin ingram this is a false name but is well know person he was a warrent officer.
anyway look the story is two long to go into it,but for me martin mcguinness loves ireland and would never take the queens pay.

He has no trouble with the queen paying for a little shinner love nest in London even though the sinn fein members of parliament refuse to take their seats preferring instead to waste the seats and chance to do some good. What a pack of wasters.

audi a4 2008

foggy_lad wrote: »

He has no trouble with the queen paying for a little shinner love nest in London even though the sinn fein members of parliament refuse to take their seats preferring instead to waste the seats and chance to do some good. What a pack of wasters.

whos a waster foggy lad?can u explain a bit more to us

foggy_lad

audi a4 2008 wrote: »

whos a waster foggy lad?can u explain a bit more to us

They won't take the queens shilling you say but they operate a love nest in London funded by the queen paid for with expenses from their Westminster seats which they don't use and rightly don't get paid for, I say the expenses should also be stopped. They are no better than spongers or dole cheats!

Pompey Magnus

foggy_lad wrote: »

He has no trouble with the queen paying for a little shinner love nest in London even though the sinn fein members of parliament refuse to take their seats preferring instead to waste the seats and chance to do some good. What a pack of wasters.

If their constituents aren't happy with their policy then they can just refuse to vote for them, as they continue to get elected then it is clear that a certain percentage of the community are satisfied with the policy. That is democracy for you.

RandomName2

PomBear wrote: »

If Vincent Browne's library, Pat Byrne, Gay Mitchell etc. are so certain of McGuinness' IRA membership post-1974, why wasn't McGuinness arrested if their sources and evidence are so strong?

Methinks it's a case of pure journalistic hearsay and frankly, very poor show by Gay Mitchell and co. when they make this accusation and propose it as fact, libelous really...

He was arrested. :pac:

Or are you asking why wasn't he arrested again?

RandomName2

audi a4 2008 wrote: »

but for me martin mcguinness loves ireland and would never take the queen's pay.

Apart from his Westminster expenses. Lol!

maccored

there werent any exemptions in the mid 70s when he was being lifted by the RUC. Funny that they never charged him then either - considering if anyone could prove he was an active IRA member after 1974, it would have been the RUC.

Pride Fighter wrote: »

There is exemptions for members of Paramilitaries under the Good Friday agreement, that's why.

Even the dogs on the street know MMG was in the IRA. He's admitted it himself. I'll still give him a high preference, a 2 or a 3, cause he is on the path of peace now. Everyone makes mistakes and deserves a second chance. He is also Deputy 1st Minister of NI and is a very experienced politician.

maccored

RandomName2 wrote: »

He was arrested. :pac:

Or are you asking why wasn't he arrested again?

arrested is one thing. being charged with IRA membership (after 1974) is quite another

Alopex

maccored wrote: »

there werent any exemptions in the mid 70s when he was being lifted by the RUC. Funny that they never charged him then either - considering if anyone could prove he was an active IRA member after 1974, it would have been the RUC.

He was an asset to British intelligence, thats not to say he was informer, just he was high up and they could use him to influence IRA policy.

They eventually used him to trick the IRA into thinking the GFA was a route to a united Ireland, rather than what it was - surrender.

So it would have been very silly to have locked him up, could have ended up with McKevitt running the show instead.

KELTICKNIGHTT

maccored wrote: »

arrested is one thing. being charged with IRA membership (after 1974) is quite another

so mmg maybe was a informer,interesting

maccored

and who told you this info? Some book? A newspaper hack? Someone on telly?

maccored

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

so mmg maybe was a informer,interesting

jesus - you people are funny. Scary that you can make so much out of so little, but funny all the same.

KELTICKNIGHTT

maccored wrote: »

jesus - you people are funny. Scary that you can make so much out of so little, but funny all the same.

shinners like their own crap but telling the truth isn't one

Alopex

maccored wrote: »

and who told you this info? Some book? A newspaper hack? Someone on telly?

I consider the likes of Anthony McIntyre and Ed Moloney to be reliable sources. They among others have written books and blogs about various subjects on the troubles

I'm not sure what you're getting at really, are there really people out there who believe McGuinness left the IRA in 1974?