Defence Forces Tribunal hears all records of official officer warnings were deleted in 1992

Defence Forces Tribunal witness Damien Traynor (left) and fellow Apprentice School witness Padraic Lenaghan (right), who told the tribunal he was forced to eat an ashtray of cigarette butts by an officer known only as 2LT.B in the tribunal. Picture: Neil Michael

The Defence Forces Tribunal has been told that the record of all official warnings against every officer in the Defence Forces was deleted in 1992.

The decision was given as a reason why the record of a reprimand against an officer alleged to have brutally abused recruits was cleared less than a year after he had been reprimanded.

The officer, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is alleged to have bullied one apprentice so badly that he took his own life on June 22, 1991.

Known only as 2LT.B in the tribunal, he is also alleged to have ordered a recruit to eat cigarette butts and to have also repeatedly assaulted and abused another recruit so badly that they suffered a nervous breakdown.

Ordinarily, army “admonishments” or reprimands stay on a soldier’s record for five years.

But one of the most senior generals in the Defence Forces in the early 1990s revealed under questioning in the tribunal that every officers’ record of admonishments was “deleted”.

Former Major General Thomas Wall said that disciplinary records were “amended to exclude admonitions and all admonitions were deleted from the records of any officer”.

Asked in cross-examination by Diarmaid McGuinness SC if that would happen after five years, he replied: “No, immediately. It happened sometime at the beginning of 1992.” 

He added later: “I have been informed afterwards by a colleague of mine that he, from officers’ records, issued instructions to the army to delete all references to admonishments.” 

Mr Wall also told the tribunal that he believed the way 2LT.B is alleged to have behaved towards apprentices at the Army Apprentice School in Devoy Barracks, Naas, was “wrong, terrible and unacceptable”, 

The 92-year-old, who gave evidence remotely via Teams, told the Defence Forces Tribunal that 2LT.B had claimed the way he behaved towards apprentices was what he had learned in his military training.

Asked what his reaction was, Mr Wall said: “I just couldn’t believe it. I thought it was terrible and it was wrong.” 

Tribunal senior counsel Aeden McGovern SC reminded him that in his statement to the tribunal earlier this year, that he also told 2LT.B that his behaviour was “completely unacceptable”.

Contradiction of 2LT.B's evidence

The retired general — who was once one of the most senior soldiers in the Irish army — also contradicted earlier evidence by 2LT.B.

When he gave evidence, the allegedly abusive officer had stated that when he asked to see Mr Wall when he was General Officer Commanding of the Curragh in 1991, 2LT.B had told the tribunal that he had wanted to see his high-ranking superior but his request for a meeting failed to result in one.

However, Mr Wall has told the tribunal that, contrary to 2LT.B’s evidence, he did in fact meet him.

“I did meet him, I had him in my office, and I remember it well,” he recalled. “I remember distinctly having 2LT.B in my office.” 

He said that he “immediately” arranged for him to be moved from the Army Apprentice School.

Asked what he would have thought about all of the abuse apprentices had had to endure, he replied: “Throughout my career, I bent over backwards for people. I was known as a bit gruff, but I always treated them properly.

“My own time in cadet school was tough, but there was no abuse, there was nobody shouting. It was civilised. I would have been appalled that the alleged abuse had taken place.”