Judge rages at ‘horrific’ claim of lawyers knowingly using false evidence

IAN Bailey accused newspaper lawyers of putting a witness in the box to give evidence they knew was false, prompting cross-examining senior counsel to say this claim was horrific and an abuse of the witness box.

The serious allegation made against solicitors and barristers for the newspapers related to the evidence given by witness Marie Farrell at Mr Bailey’s failed libel action at Cork Circuit Court three years ago.

She testified that she saw the plaintiff at Kealfadda Bridge on the night of the murder. She recanted this evidence in October 2005. Mr Bailey made the claim the newspaper lawyers knew during the original trial her statement was false.

“Solicitors for the newspapers were aware Marie Farrell had made a fabricated statement.

“That was made known to barristers. That witness was still used in the case,” Mr Bailey said.

Defence senior counsel Paul Gallagher diverted from his cross-examination of Ian Bailey to address Mr Justice Brian McGovern directly: “Mr Bailey has made this allegation.

“ It is wholly and utterly false. It is wholly inappropriate he should use the witness box to make that allegation.”

Mr Justice McGovern said: “A very serious imputation has been made against counsel and solicitors for newspapers in the privileged position of the witness box.”

The judge asked how the lawyers could have known the witness was going to recant her statement more than a year later. Mr Bailey said during a lunch break he became aware a particular solicitor for the newspapers knew Ms Farrell was going to give false evidence.

Mr Gallagher described that allegation as horrific. The judge warned Mr Bailey: “It is something that should not be said in the witness box. I am not going to deal with it now.”

Mr Gallagher cross-examined the plaintiff on an interview he gave on February 14, 1997, where he was asked if he had ever met Sophie Toscan du Plantier and he replied he had never met her, never been introduced to her, never spoke to her, but he did have knowledge of her when he was with a neighbour who pointed her out. Mr Gallagher said: “That neighbour said he introduced you to Ms du Plantier.”

Mr Bailey replied: “He thought he might have.” The senior counsel referred again to the neighbour, Alf Lyons, and said: “He gave sworn evidence in Cork Circuit Court where he said he was 90% sure he had.”

Mr Bailey replied: “I am 1,000% sure he hadn’t.” Mr Gallagher referred to the Pat Kenny radio interview given by Mr Bailey 10 years ago and said: “You were telling the public and telling Mr Kenny that it was reasonable for the gardaí to regard you as a suspect at the time.”

Mr Bailey said: “I could see I was being referred to as a suspect.”

The senior counsel referred to the transcript and read: “It was quite reasonable at that time to be a suspect.” Mr Bailey replied: “I can understand how people would think I was.”

Mr Gallagher said: “That is not what you say, you say there. It was quite reasonable at that time to be a suspect.” Mr Bailey said: “Okay, I am saying that.”

Mr Gallagher said: “Mr Kenny said, ‘The cloud over your name will not be lifted really until someone is charged and convicted of the murder.’”

Mr Bailey responded: “Yes, I believed that to be true then and true now.”

Mr Gallagher put it to the plaintiff a newspaper report that gardaí believed that in the murder victim’s desperate efforts to save her life she grabbed on to her killer and there might be DNA evidence in her closed hand.

Mr Bailey said: “That is why I was required to give a hair sample and a blood sample later, I took the view that would show I’d nothing to do with it.

“As I am here today and have never been charged, I must conclude that must be the case.”