Weight of evidence stacked against Callinan

If the weight of evidence wasn’t stacked against Martin Callinan, he would make for a convincing witness, writes Michael Clifford.

He addresses each question with the earnestness of one who is eager to be of as much assistance as possible to the chairman of the Disclosures Tribunal.

He is clear in his answers. He speaks in a voice that undulates in soothing tones.

He is confident, even when having to explain how so many people are saying that in 2013-14 he was going around the place telling how Sgt Maurice McCabe was untrustworthy and that he was under investigation for sexual offences. They are all simply wrong, the witness said.

Of course, back in the day, when he presided over what he once referred to as “my” police force, he was practiced in appearing before Dáil committees and accounting for An Garda Síochána.

That was good practice for the last three days in the witness box at Dublin Castle. In fact, there was just a few occasions in a forensic cross-examination by Michael McDowell that the former commissioner appeared momentarily unsure of himself.

The only problem is the weight of evidence against him. His former press officer, Superintendent Dave Taylor, has told the tribunal that Callinan directed him to smear McCabe with false and scurrilous allegations of child sexual abuse.

McCabe was bearing uncomfortable truths about malpractice in the force, and, in Taylor’s version, Callinan was completely obsessed with the Cavan-based sergeant.

The respective evidence of the two former senior gardaí, and how it has raked over their sundered relationship, had some of the drama of one of those mob trials in the USA, where a made man has turned informer.

Once upon a time these two guys were top cops. Callinan was the boss, Taylor did his bidding in the media as press officer. Then the boss had to go, and his underling was devastated.

The tribunal has seen a text sent by Taylor to Callinan days after the latter’s forced retirement in March 2014.

“Commissioner, I feel so sorry for the way you have been treated — its despicable. You will always be the Boss to me and I am proud to have served under you and worked with you. You were inspirational to me. I wish you and your family all the best for the future and if I can do anything to help please let me know. Dave.”

Callinan responded: “Thank you Dave. I appreciate your kind remarks. M.”

Now they are at loggerheads, Taylor having implicated Callinan in a smear campaign, which he denies.

That allegation against Callinan is manageable simply because Taylor’s credibility is in the basement following his own evidence.

An infinitely more serious threat to Callinan’s legacy as a leading police officer is the evidence of the five who have come forward to say that he was smearing McCabe’s character himself.

These are TDs John McGuinness and John Deasy; Comptroller and Auditor General Seamus McCarthy; RTÉ journalist, Philip Boucher Hayes; and celebrity solicitor Gerard Kean.

Of these the claims of McGuinness and McCarthy are the most serious. These both involve allegations that Callinan said McCabe was under investigation for child sexual abuse, which was entirely false.

Yesterday, Callinan sought to discredit McGuinness’s account. Michael McDowell for McCabe asked why McGuinness would make up such a story.

“It is the case that Deputy McGuinness has met one of two of the key witnesses,” Callinan replied. “And I don’t know what they said. I’m not making any allegations, I’m merely saying that there was interaction between Deputy McGuinness and Sergeant McCabe.”

The lawyer asked him: “Are you seriously saying that Sergeant McCabe put Deputy McGuinness up to telling lies about you?”

No he was not, Callinan replied. But the vignette was typical of the jabs that Callinan attempted to land in response to the evidential pummelling he was receiving from the testimonies at variance with his.

He described McGuinness’s evidence as “crazy”. He said Mr Boucher Hayes may have received a negative briefing from his, the commissioner’s, staff rather than himself.

As for Seamus McCarthy, there may well have been a “misunderstanding”. And John Deasy, well, one explanation raised in the witness box is that the deputy was a colleague of McGuinness’s on the Public Accounts Committee.

Yet, it’s difficult by any stretch to get out from under the sheer weight and variety of the punches delivered to Callinan’s credibility.

He is fighting for his legacy. Should the chairman, Peter Charleton, rule that he did indeed say the things that these other men say he did, then his 40 years of public service, culminating in the role of commissioner, will be overshadowed by the spectre that he tried to bury a Garda whistleblower in a despicable manner.

At one point yesterday, McGuinness’s counsel, Darren Lehane, suggested to Callinan that he is accusing the deputy of fabricating evidence about their meeting.

“That’s between him and his maker,” Callinan replied.

“And I’m happy to go to mine knowing that I’m telling the truth.”

Finally, the lawyer said that he had to put it to Callinan that he had “spun a web of lies around your interaction with Deputy McGuinness”.

Callinan denied the suggestion. His evidence is now concluded. The tribunal rolls onto Nóirín O’Sullivan next week.