The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission has secured High Court orders entitling it to get transcripts of separate proceedings before the Special Criminal Court concerning two men, including Adrian Creaven Mackin, the killer of Garda Tony Golden.
The second man is Eimantas Valteris, whose March 2017 trial collapsed after the defence introduced an audio recording allegedly made by him of an encounter with gardaí after his arrest in 2013 on a charge of having a semi-automatic pistol which he denied.
It was alleged, in the recording, Mr Valteris was told he would be looked after if he accepted responsibility for three other firearms and four silencers but, if he did not, gardaí would be “directed” to arrest his partner and their child would go into care.
Gsoc is conducting separate investigations into interactions by gardaí with both men.
In pursuit of those, its counsel Ronan Kennedy BL sought High Court orders on Wednesday allowing it to access the transcripts of proceedings before the non jury SCC.
It wanted those in pursuit of a fair and impartial investigation, counsel said.
The application was necessary because the SCC had concluded, without a specific court rule, it had no jurisdiction to make such an order and it was a matter for the High Court.
Jurisdiction
The Director of Public Prosecutions, the Garda Commissioner, Minister for Justice, Mr Valteris and a Garda Detective Sergeant alleged to have been part of the alleged conversation with Mr Valteris were notice parties to the application and all neither consented nor objected to it.
The president of the High Court, Mr Justice Peter Kelly, said he was satisfied he had jurisdiction to make the orders sought and should do so.
He was satisfied the best evidence was to be found in the relevant transcripts and that Gsoc is entitled to access those.
In a sworn statement, a Gsoc investigation officer said the investigation concerning Mr Mackin concerns whether gardaí acted appropriately upon their knowledge of his access to, or possession of explosives and firearms, including taking measures to mitigate the serious risk this potentially posed to his former partner, Ms Siobhán Phillips, the general public and gardaí.
The investigation will examine the extent and nature of the interaction between gardaí and Mr Mackin, whether Ms Phillips and her family were treated properly by gardaí and their complaints about his behaviour were appropriately acted upon.
It will also examine whether there was delay in the Garda review of the circumstances surrounding the incident in Omeath, Co Louth, on October 11th 2015 when Mr Mackin, then on bail on a charge of IRA membership, shot and killed Garda Golden when the garda went to the house Mr Mackin shared with Ms Phillips in Omeath.
During the same incident, Ms Phillips suffered serious injuries and Mr Mackin took his own life.
Dissident activities
The separate investigation concerning Mr Valteris arose from the collapse in March 2017 of his trial before the SCC.
In a sworn statement, another Gsoc investigating officer said Mr Valteris was arrested in June 2013 as part of an ongoing operation by gardaí to counter dissident republican activities in the border area.
It was alleged he was in possession of a semi-automatic pistol which he was storing but he denied unlawful possession of a semi-automatic pistol at an industrial estate in Navan, Co Meath.
His trial collapsed on its fourth day and the DPP entered a nolle prosequi after the defence introduced, during a trial within a trial hearing, the alleged audio recording of an encounter with gardaí in 2013.
It was alleged the recording showed Mr Valteris was told, if he did not accept responsibility for three other firearms and four silencers, gardaí would be directed to arrest his partner and their child would go into care.
It was also alleged Mr Valteris was asked if they had a deal and was told, if they did not, they were going to have to arrest his partner.
The Gsoc officer said Gsoc had decided, in the public interest, to undertake an investigation into the events that lead to the collapse of the trial and whether a Detective Sergeant alleged to have been involved in the alleged conversation with Mr Valteris may have committed an offence or behaved in a manner that would justify disciplinary proceedings.
