A Limerick woman who campaigns for safe zones around facilities offering abortion services has apologised for a “highly defamatory” tweet she posted about David Quinn, chief executive of the Iona Institute.
Karen Sugrue, one of the founders of the Together for Safety group, has also paid €8,000 to Mr Quinn in settlement of a threatened High Court action for defamation arising from the tweet she posted in May of last year.
Ms Sugrue said that a year ago she was in a queue in a supermarket when she saw that Mr Quinn had posted a critical comment on Twitter about doctors who performed abortions. She “broke all my own rules,” she said, in relation to always being civil in public debate in her response on the same platform.
She was contacted a few days later by solicitors acting for Mr Quinn who threatened to take her to the High Court for defamation. She said she refused to sign an agreement that included a confidentiality clause but from the outset wanted to apologise and settle in relation to the tweet.
Nosferatu director Robert Eggers: ‘We needed to find a way to make the vampire scary again’
Christmas - and the perfect family life it represents - is an oppressive fantasy
The 50 best films of 2024 – a full list in reverse order
‘A taxi, compliments of Irish Rail. What service!’ A Christmas customer service miracle
A single parent, she said the threat of being brought to the High Court, where she could have faced potential damages of €80,000, led to her fearing she could lose her home.
“I have always been of the opinion that it was appropriate that I apologise to Mr Quinn,” the mother of two said. “I want to get the word out now to other activists. People don’t know about defamation. There are people putting stuff up online all the time that makes them incredibly vulnerable.”
In her apology, which was exchanged between solicitors and has not been published, Ms Sugrue said she “unreservedly apologises for the highly defamatory comments she made on Twitter in respect of Mr David Quinn” in May of last year and “regrets any hurt or upset she caused to Mr Quinn and his family.”
Last year in the Dáil the Green Party TD Neasa Hourigan mentioned Mr Quinn’s threat of legal action during a debate on defamation and strategic lawsuits against public participation (Slapps), which are threats of legal action designed to silence critics rather than seek damages.
However Mr Quinn has said that his threat to lodge proceedings against Ms Sugrue was not a Slapp action, but arose because what had been said about him was “at the very extreme end of defamation”.
“The tweet was taken down, but it was so shockingly bad that I felt obliged to take action. As for it being a Slapp lawsuit, the truth is, it is a much more mundane case than that. There is no grand strategy here.”
There were no other threats of legal action from him against others. “She is the only one. It was because the defamation was so bad, it couldn’t be left stand.” The €8,000 will go to his legal costs, with the remainder going to charity.
Speaking last year in the Dáil – where TDs cannot be sued for defamation because of parliamentary privilege – Ms Hourigan named Mr Quinn, but not Ms Sugrue, when she raised Ms Sugrue’s case. Mr Quinn, she said, “has threatened legal action against a member of a group advocating for safe access zones for women accessing abortions”.
“He has asked not only for money and an apology, but also the signing of an NDA [non-disclosure agreement]. Mr Quinn has targeted this group in his columns before and his opinions cannot reasonably be disentangled from those of his employer, the Iona Institute,” she said.
“A great many activists and groups in Ireland could have received similar letters from Mr Quinn but, of course, neither we nor the Government will ever know that,” because of NDAs and the cases being settled before they go to court, she said.
Mr Quinn did not want to comment on Ms Hourigan’s decision to name him in the Dáil.
A spokesman for Ms Hourigan said she had no comment.
Safe zones are areas outside abortion facilities where anti-abortion campaigners would not be allowed to protest.
