Hain invites Finucanes to talk about inquiry

Peter Hain has invited the family of Pat Finucane to talk to him about an inquiry under the Inquiries Act.

  • Glen Taisie

    “I do not envisage that any people who were involved in the murders of nationalists … is ever going to be brought before a court in this day and age.”

    “state killers would be able to get the benefit of the legislation. What possibility is there that these people would ever stand before a court -I think there is no possibility whatsoever. I am not as naïve as Mark appears to be.

    The people who would “gain most advantage from this are those nationalists and republicans who are on the run for over 30 years.”


  • This in simply disgusting – pressuring the poor family to go along with a most biased process.

    The government cannot lose. If the Finucanes still refuse to go along with a process which only suits the security forces, they will be called difficult spoilers. If they do agree, there is no chance in hell that the truth and justice will prevail.

    Pat Finucane was murdered – like Francisco Notarantonio on October 9, 1987 – to keep ‘Steak Knife’ from being murdered by a UDA murder squad, thanks to the intervention by the FRU. ‘Steak Knife’ was the prize informer who the British had developed within the Army Council, and the FRU was afraid if he was killed, not only would his take stop but also he might well see that Finucane told embarrassing tales about the deceased.

    London will no more permit a fair, full inquiry of this than it did with Dr. David Kelly.

    Look at the politization of the murder of WMD inspector – who was outed by Downing Street, only to be killed by unknown assailants on Harrowdown Hill on the night of July 17, 2003. Lord Hutton decided to employ a suicide expert, Prof. Keith Hawton, to determine the cause of death, and Hawton simply presumed Kelly committed suicide, overlooking the leisons on his legs, bruises around both knees, bruises on his chest, three noticeable scratches on his head, and a bruised lower lip when his mouth was pried open, and drugs forced down his throat.

    Anyone who trusts the Blair government to conduct a fair criminal inquiry of a killing when its policies are at stake is simply daft!

  • Concerned Loyalist

    Just as members of the security services and people who aided them in anyway (e.g. workmen)
    were seen as “legitimate targets” in the eyes of republicans, republicans and anyone who aided them in anyway were “legitimate targets” in the eyes of the UFF and UVF.

    The point I’m making is that the UFF’s killing of Pat Finucane is no worse or no different to the near on 2,000 people killed by the Provos…I know it is stretching logic but i believe it actually helped to save lives from murderers he would have defended and possibly got acquitted, who were then free to go about their evil work.

  • WestBelfastBoy

    Typical loyalist response from you CL. A “hey sure he was only a Taig” comment.

    “Republicans and anyone who aided them in anyway were “legitimate targets” in the eyes of the UFF and UVF”

    No, as it has been shown since their creation and more so since they started the modern day troubles in 1966 the UVF and their ilk have targeted people for being Catholics. Nothing more, nothing less.

  • martin ingram

    The point I’m making is that the UFF’s killing of Pat Finucane is no worse or no different to the near on 2,000 people killed by the Provos…I know it is stretching logic but i believe it actually helped to save lives from murderers he would have defended and possibly got acquitted, who were then free to go about their evil work.

    You are wrong and it is offensive to argue that point. That is anarchy

    Martin Ingram.

  • That makes at least seven posts, Ingram, on this site that you assured viewers on RBB that you were taking a vacation from. When does your spin ever stop, as Bill O’Reilly, that American scum bag, would say? (Note that the question mark is different from the exclamation mark.)

    Atleast your post is not simply UFF posturing about all things and killings being equal, but you make no effort to distinguish why Finucane’s assassination was particularly repulsive.

    Finucane’s murder was beyond the pale because it showed British security forces, particularly the FRU, and their covert, sectarian assassins who only benefited from the on-going collusion process – where opponents of British rule in Ireland were surreptitiously gotten rid of, or its agents in the sectarian communities were disposed of to keep the whole killing process going in order to promote some kind of stalemate – what we have now in spades.

    When are you, Ingram, going to get off your soap box, and say something damaging and revealing about the whole ugly process????

  • martin ingram


    I told you last night that I have postponed my holiday.

    If you have a problem with my last post here please feel free to post. This is what I said

    Quote”You are wrong and it is offensive to argue that point. That is anarchy” Unquote

    Is that a problem?


  • I do have a problem with what you posted in response to CL as it is offensive NOT to argue the point. You should have stated why the assassination of Pat Finucane was so barbaric rather than just running for cover.

    The murder, it seems, was particularly offensive because it not only protected ‘Steak Knife’at his expense but also killed a solicitor whose job was to protect criminals, especially alleged terrorists, when faced with arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment. The murder of Finucane was what the FRU covert operators preferred, the loyalist assassins took great pleasure in, and the British system of justice was rendered inoperative by.
    And now the Secretary of State hopes to replicate what Lord Hutton did two years ago. Perhaps, if it works, we shall soon be talking about Lord Hain of Huttondon.

  • T

    Wow, CL, just amazing. Right, killing the defense lawyers will bring an end to murders. And I guess you’re right because there are still murders being committed and that must be because all defense lawyers haven’t been killed yet. By the way, when someone you know stands in the box accused, remind that poor soul that there is no defense attorney available because they have all been killed to protect society. Incredible.

  • The Dubliner

    Trowbridge, if you look at the amount of gagging orders that Geoff Hoon has been slapping on anything to do with the FRU for the 6 years (many related to Martin Ingram) and his department’s constant frustration of the work of the Steven’s Inquiry, you get a good picture of just how offensive the request from Peter Hain is. Does anyone think for one second that it isn’t Geoff Hoon’s suggestion which is designed not to reveal the truth but to further protect the dirty secrets of the FRU why having a restricted whitewash? For their control of Britain’s citizen killing machines in the north, Margaret Walshaw was given an honour in the queen’s award and Gordon Kerr was promoted. That shows clearly what Britian won’t have either of them seen for what both of them are: serial murderers in the pay of the state.

  • Alan


    Using your logic, the solicitor who gets somone off doing time for shoplifting is responsible for manslaughter should the shoplifter kill someone when drunk driving the next day.

  • barcas

    No-one seems to be concerned that the Government led by Tony Blair made a public and solemn promise that a full public judicial inquiry into the death of Pat Finucane would be held, following the Cory Report. There were no “ifs and buts”, no caveats and no limits set as to the ‘public’ naure of the inquiry when the undertaking was given.

    For that same Government, now, to have made new rules potentially limiting, possibly and, indeed, probably prejudicing the final report and to present the Finucane family with the ultimatum that “there will be an inquiry under the Inquiry Act, or none at all” is, in my view, a quite dishonourable postion to have adopted.

    Blair and Hain, if they are to retain any semblance of honour and integrity with regard to the matter, must retract the statement and instigate the Inquiry as originally promised.

    Pigs might fly, also. I am not holding my breath.

  • Barcas, you cannot have read what was posted before yours. I and many others have been going on about this proposed travesty of justice from when it was first floated well over a year ago.

    It’s not a problem of the concerned public not listening and trying to do something about it, but a government which is deaf,conniving and totally committed to its own self-serving ends.

  • topdeckomnibus

    I wonder whether the inquiry into the death of David Kelly was in contravention of the UK commitment to the UN Minnesota Protocol.

    And I wonder if the same applies to the case of the murder of Pat Finucane.

    If a death carries a suspicion of govt involvement then surely the commitment under Minnesota Protocol must preclude government from setting terms of reference or taking any sort of admin role in the inquiry ?

    The McGILL Decd case was submitted to European Court of Human Rights in an attempt to invoke Minnesota Protocol.


    This death occurred before UK became signatory to the convention. So by DIY law only the argument was that the original evidence of identification had been rebutted. Hence the body was entitled to fair inquest within seventy years with the new identication evidence arising after UK became signatory.

    This circular argument of course got nowhere as the Attorney General simply used his secret public interest custodianship power to refuse to consider the fact that the original identification had been rebutted.

    But if a person dies then the investigating police are sworn to the Crown to pursue duty unto law … which is sort of meant to uphold judicial independence and primacy.

    And if the Crown Oath of the Constable means nothing then the Crown means nothing and so the denial of justice (which is supposed to be one of the founts of the Crown) ends up damaging the existing scheme of things anyway.

    There are many people on these threads with far greater knowledge than I of human rights law and history.

    All I know is that if a constable is charged with the duty of HM Coroners Officer then at some point he wants to tell a Judge about it .. and with Crown authority he bends hhis knee to no man in the discharge of duty but the Judge in Open Court.

    Quixotic ?

    Sometimes the right thing to do is simple to understand and difficult (and dangerous) to execute.

    I hope the Finucanes get justice. They should know they can contact me if they want evidence about the arrests within Kent Territorial Army 1987 of paramilitaries recruited from the TA. Not that may be of immediate evidential value but it might inform some of the unlawful activity which went on that has escaped inquiry.

  • Please explain, topdeckomnibus, how the Minnesota Protocol against the international trafficking of persons, especially women and children, could have any possible connection to an inquiry into the murder of Dr. David Kelly – where the Blair government intervened in an apparently open-and-shut suicide case to completely corrupt the verdict.

    If Dr. Kelly had simply killed himself, there would have been no problem for the Oxfordshire coroner to determine so. But since he didn’t, Blair crony, the Lord Chancellor, took control of the whole process by appointing Lord Hutton to conduct a completely biased proceeding where the cause of death was completely smothered by the spin from Downing Street about the basis of the pre-emptive war, ousting Iraq’s Saddam.

    And the basic reason why I made the comparison in a discussion of a proper inquiry into the Finucane murder is that Blair’s track record shows that he is incapable of appointing such an inquiry – what bodes most ill for the other inquiries Canadian Judge Peter Cory recommended, much less the 2,000 or so murders still unsolved in God-forsaken Northern Ireland.

  • T. H . Ford ,

    “Steak Knife” aka Scap was not on the Army Council. (We have a controlling interst there anyhow.)He was Norhern Command (where, again, we have a controlling interest!)

    “and the FRU was afraid if he was killed, not only would his take stop but also he might well see that Finucane told embarrassing tales about the deceased. ”

    Now, lets try and make some sense out of that! If he (Steak Knife)was killed how could he see that Finucane told embarrassing tales about him?

    How would Finucane get to know these things?After all, he was just an innocent solicitor, wasn’t he????????

    As for your allegations concerning Dr. Kelly, they have about as much substance as your other posts concerning assassinations, your poisoning in Portugal and Matin Ingram being James Rennie.

    T. H. Ford’s statements can be viewed as having the same degree of accuracy as those of Gerard Adams when he states he is not, and never was, a member of the ira!

  • Just more massive disinformation, Intelligence Insider.

    I have contended throughout that Scap aka ‘Stake Knife’was not ‘Steak Knife’apparently aka Padraig Wilson who was the tout you had on the Army Council.

    Pat Finucane represented clients within the Provosionals, so it was hardly surprising that he represented ‘Steak Knife’ – what’s how his loyalist murder squad made the connection. And that’s what solicitors do, represent people under threat.

    Dr. Kelly was murdered, and I was nearly so in Portugal. Just look at what the forensic pathologists testified about his physical condition. Prof. Keith Hawton’s claims just make no sense, as do yours about my not being poisoned.

    And who ‘Martin Ingram’ is still remains anyone’s guess. His denials that he was originally Jack Grantham leave his identify an open question. He might still turn out to be Captain James Rennie. We still just want a picture of the so-called MI5 agent’s face and hands.

    In short, instead of just engaging in personal attacks, and disinformation, why don’t you start telling what you know, if it is anything, rather than just keep hidden Downing Street and Whitehall secrets???

  • topdeckomnibus

    T H Ford Thank you for your response. The first attempt I made to put the Mary McGill Decd case into European Court of Human Rights was 1994.

    I am not a lawyer. But I felt I had to do the best I could for Mary and her family who were supporting my efforts. (In fact the last surviving next of kin in New Zealand had his NZ MP Mark Burton attend him, during terminal care, to say he would continue to support the fight for justice and I sent a message, at the request of a fellow member of his congregation, to say that I would fight the cause unto death)

    Under Article 6 of the ECHR Inquests are not accorded a right of fair trial.

    So I tried to argue under Article 2 Rights to Life that there could be no rights to life fully upheld unless there co existed certainty of proper sudden death inquiry. This relates to the discovery that Special Branch were secretly monitoring and corrupting (influencing) police inquiries into Sue Ryder and leonard Cheshire Homes. Hence the reference (on the site) to unlawful police no go areas.

    I failed to gain admissibility in 1994 because the matter was deemed not subject of the ECHR articles.

    In 1995 (I am giving you a pretty full answer here) there was a custody death at Margate Police Station of a man called Phillip Seed.

    Deploying on to his custody death investigation (I say a wangle) was invigilating for PCA Supt George Rogers. Who was also Deputy Senior CID of the 1989 Deal Barracks bombing investigation.

    Coroners Officer was civilian (former police) David Billings.

    A problem arose in the case when toxicology handled by Rogers came back showing a massive paracetomol overdose whereas Coroners samples handled by Billings shew no such thing.

    It seems that Billings then revealed to the bereaved family (and others including me) that he did not trust George Rogers as he had seen “Property removed by senior CID at the Deal Bombing scene which did not re-appear as evidence” He had also overheard senior CID discuss at the bomb scene a name (which I know was one of the Reliance guards) and take a decision to exempt that name and Reliance from the scope of the bombing inquiry.

    Billings reported to the Coroner, as I understand it, that Rogers toxicology in Seed Decd had gone missing for four days. And indeed the possibility of doctoring evidence I think was mentioned at the next inquest hearing in Thanet.

    It seems that Rogers, in return, reported Billings as unsafe in handling an evidence chain (one of his roles being initiating such a chain at the Deal bomb scene)

    At some point in all this a free barrister from the charity Inquest … Yvette Gell … appears to have advised the bereaved family to expedite inquest to gain grounds for appeal.

    The charity Inquest had then recently provided expert witnesses in the matter of non judicial execution for the Farrell Savage McCann case in ECHR.

    I discovered (out theme is denial of justice) that Rebecca Cobb Coroner proposed to hold the final inquest hearing whilst Billings was on holiday. The coroner proposed to read a prepared statement from Billings and thus to have him unavailable for questioning by Yvette Gell or by Paul Summerfield the bereaved family solicitor.

    I reported this to the Attorney General. And in fact two weeks later Rebecca Cobb removed herself as Coroner in the case and functus officio Deal bombing Coroner Richard Sturt of Dover held a new procedure and no appeal arose.

    An appeal would in my view have compromised the 1989 Kent Police Deal bombing investigation team. And it probably needs examining but not via an opportunistic appeal to Attorney General which would end up in his secret public interest custodianship bin.

    I got to thinking how come Farrel Savage McCann got a case in ECHR about a Gibraltar Inquest when Mary McGill had not been admissble about a Suffolk Inquest.

    So I wrote to ECHR.

    They responded about the Farrell Savage McCann case and it was in that correspondence that the Minnesota Protocol was mentioned in the context of conferring rights of independent investigation in deaths where govt involvement is suspected.

    And that is why I re submitted the McGill case stressing the reasons I suspect government involvement.

    I am not a human rights lawyer. I stand to be corrected and or informed. There is no legal aid for this. So I just do the best I can.

  • Topdeckomnibus, I dont’t see that you can do much about it. The issue of the Minnesota Protocol seems to be nothing more than if there was a case of suspected murder in the handling of human trafficking, the issue could be heard by the ECHR.

    To get it interested in PIRA volunteers assassinated by British covert forces, whether they be McCann, Farrell or Savage, or an legal representative of such victims, like Pat Finucane, you would have to mount some case, refuting what some coroner or some case had determined.

    Given the posture of Downing Street and Whitehall about such matters, I think that the possibility of mounting such a case is nil.

    Just look to what happened to Finucane after Home Office minister Douglas Hogg warned him in the Commons that representing Provos like ‘Steak Knife’ could be most dangerous. Two weeks later, a loyalist assassination squad, organized by Brian Nelson, killed him after ‘Mags’ aka Sergeant Margaret Walshaw re-directed their efforts against ‘SK’ to the Belfast solicitor.

    This is death squads operating at a high-level of efficiency – what the banana republics like Chile and Argentina were never capable of doing.

    And a P. S. for I. I. How are you so sure that no one tried to kill me when I had regular seizures for nearly four years after visiting the restautant in Caldas da Rainha – three of which nearly killed me, and the doctors, even after a cap scan, who treated me could never explain the cause of my difficulties?

    I suppose it was just coincidence – like the bullets which struck done Finucane!

  • topdeckomnibus


    Here is a paste about the Protocol


    A. Introduction

    Suspected extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions can be investigated under established national or local laws and can lead to criminal proceedings. In some cases, however, investigative procedures may be inadequate because of the lack of resources and expertise or because the agency assigned to conduct the investigation may be partial. Hence, such criminal proceedings are less likely to be brought to a successful outcome.

    As I understood the matter UK signed up in 88 and thus was bound to set minimum standards of full ondependent investigation into deaths where govt involvement is suspected (David Kelly, Mary McGill. Pat Finucane)

  • Topdeckomnibus, I just don’t think a favorable result, which would be hard to obtain, would be worth the effort.

    All sensible people know that Dr. Kelly’s and Pat Finucane’s human rights were violated when they were murdered by unknown assailants, with at least British complicity in their outing. All the ECHR can do is establish what is pretty obvious – what could only result in a monetary award, like what Gervaise McKerr’s widow received after he was assassinated by a reinforced RUC, HMSU, led apparently by Captain Simon Hayward back during the emergency in South Armagh during the fall of 1982.

    I doubt that either Finucane’s or Kelly’s survivors would either assist or settle for such an outcome, and their help would be essential in any such case.

  • topdeckomnibus


    Yes, it would be a matter for the Kelly and Finucane families … you are right.

    IF the Finucanes want my evidence (and I have given my details to the Finucane Human Rights Centre after speaking with the Methodist minister of the Warrington Peace Mission some years ago) then I will depose it.

    My evidence might be relevant ( I do not know) but it relates to the arrests of 21 Kent based Territorial Army soldiers in 1987 in possession of semtex allegedly and with a number of soldiers storing semtex at their home address(es). These are the arrests referred to in the book of faction “Who Pays the Ferryman” by Pat Monteath which has a synopsis on web.

    The account to me of one of these arrested soldiers was that they had carried out “Undercover” missions into Ulster and Ireland. That they had been selected as in middle age they did not resemble serving regular soldiers.

    The case officer for the arrests was George Rogers (see above for who “wangled” his appointment as invigilator for the Seed custody death) who later became deputy senior CID on the Deal bombing case.

    A man associated with the 21 arrested TA soldiers went on to gain work as a Reliance security guard at Deal Barracks. He was the subject of the various complaints to George Rogers from 1988 to review security at Deal Barracks.

    There were no charges brought after the arrests in 1987.

    If you go to http://www.matron-mcgill-decd.com/ and click the icon about this site and then take the link to John Allens Final Prayer ?

    I drew that up as comfort for John in then hospice and to help act as a summary of remedies I tried to seek in ECHR.

    You might note that the remedy sought in police complaint law has been achieved.

    Also General Dr Chasterlain did contact me and checked his terms of reference to see whether he could deploy to Kent to investigate Kent Police firearms cert issues and the 21 arrested TA soldiers. He seems to have been prevented by their being members of the security forces !!

    George Rogers in 1987 asked to interview me after the 21 arrests and came to ask me why I was interested (in the context of one of the arrested men George Richard Maison a former REME TA man based at the HQ of Army Intelligence Ashford) in Colonel Robert Butler (the man it is now emerging was paramilitary recruiter for Airey Neave back in the 70s)

    You will note I hope that Airey Neave was one of the MI6 founding trustees of Sue Ryder Homes where Matron McGll died at the HQ.

    All paths to Neave are trod over unlawful police no go areas ??

    The difference between your argument about Kelly and Finucane against the McGill situation is this. The last NOK made a death bed wish for me to pursue justice for his sister unto my death as I am sworn to do (you will gather that I was the dissenting young copper in the case)

    I have been advised that the McGill case is the most important police constitutional case since 1829 and the most important religious implication case for 2000 years !

    And maybe when the Catholics get on with making Leonard Cheshire a saint (MI6 new agent in heaven ?) the McGill case will come home to roost ?

    I took an oath to use all skill to pursue justice faithfully only unto law. I may not have much skill but I am sworn to use all of it.

    And I make no attempt to disguise who I am or what my objectives are.

    However my experience has made me think. A little lighthearted story to illustrate.

    In my first few years of life I had to wear calipers on my legs due to rickets. Many years later (in the Army) a Squadron sergeant major quipped to me that if the avowedly marxist types had got their way (meaning IRA in those days) then “To each according to his need and from each according to his ability” would have meant that there was never the vitamin deficiencies which had caused my rickets !

    His next advice (because I still had legs which looked like tent pegs) was when I parachuted remember to wear big boots.

  • Well, Topdeckomnibus, your long shot seems out of the question now.

    The Finucanes have apparently rejected the trap that Hain has most dishonesty proposed, and they are demanding, as they rightfully should, a complete, independent inquiry into the calculated assassination of Patrick Finucane.

    If Britain doesn’t want to end up tagged as a mango monarchy, a country which allowed its death squads to operate with impunity, it will have to appoint some such inquiries.

  • WestSideHK

    First off, Martin Ingram is a wanna-be. Anyone is Special Operations (American, British or otherwise) doesen’t go doing interviews, selling books, and divulging state secrets. If this punk was a real threat or was telling the truth about anyhting, either the Britis or the IRA would have waxed his ass already. The thing this guy (and every other FRU pussy) fails to mention, is that despite thier best efforts, the IRA still kicked thier asses, along with the UDA and UVF (90 of whose members were aced by the IRA and INLA, during te past 30 years.) As for “sex on a stick” Capt Margaret Walshaw…..

    This dumb bitch is obviously a wanna-be, racist, loyalist, terrorist whore. She is a coward who despite her best efforts (and the efforts of the FRU), STILL managed to get thier asses handed to them by the IRA. This dumb slut is lucky the IRA is on cesefire, cause if they went after her, she wouldn’t stand a chance in hell. According to this chick’s picture, she is worth “bending over” a few times, other then that she is a waste of air.

  • It is reassuring to see that Bertie Ahern has called again upon the British government to appoint an independent inquiry into the assassination of Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane – what Canadian judge Peter Cory recommended – and has assured the Irish parliament that his government will not cooperate with anything less – what Hain is pressuring the family to participate in one under the terms of the Inquiries Act which maintains ministerial control of crucial matters.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    CL: “The point I’m making is that the UFF’s killing of Pat Finucane is no worse or no different to the near on 2,000 people killed by the Provos…I know it is stretching logic but i believe it actually helped to save lives from murderers he would have defended and possibly got acquitted, who were then free to go about their evil work. ”

    Stretching? How about twisting into a pretzel…

    I would also point out that, iirc, Finucane also defended Loyalist gunmen. Interesting your missing that particular point. But then, isn’t that what Unionist / Loyalist / British partisans have always been against — a full and honest examination of the facts and circumstances?

    Westside HK: “First off, Martin Ingram is a wanna-be. Anyone is Special Operations (American, British or otherwise) doesen’t go doing interviews, selling books, and divulging state secrets.”

    Actually, I can think of several special ops operators — name men, leading edges in the field, who have entered the literary and speaking fields after their careers have been back-burnered or otherwise sacrificed for the benefit of others.