It is near impossible to prove which O’Brien documents are the originals

Denis O’Brien may be a lot of things, but a fool isn’t one of them. 

He must surely have known the fallout that would occur over his attempt to silence Catherine Murphy. What is he trying to keep hidden that is worth all the negative exposure to which he is uncharacteristically subjecting himself?

O’Brien has stated that documents were stolen and altered, and that it is these documents to which Catherine Murphy was referring in the Dáil. He is stating this as if it were fact; nowhere does he mention the word ‘allegedly’. The media are reiterating his statement, also without the word ‘allegedly’, thereby lending some credibility to O’Brien’s statement. This is unfair to Murphy, but what else would you expect from a master of media.

It appears that O’Brien has backed himself into a corner O’Brien appears to be trying to rewrite history, while clutching at ‘every’ legal avenue to ensure that he gets the result that he desires.

O’Brien alleges that documents were stolen and altered and that he has the originals, or access to them, that prove this. But is this true?

What about a scenario whereby the original documents were removed and related to the Dáil. This was discovered by people who may be incriminated by the exposure of these documents. These people could, in theory, alter the documents to reflect whatever position they chose in order to suit their agenda.

How can you prove, beyond doubt, which of the documents are the originals?

There are undoubtedly people who can verify the truth. These people need to do right by the people of Ireland.

John O’Hara

Old Burrin

Carlow