Deputy First Minister’s brother-in-law refused bail

Marvin Canning, brother-in-law of the Deputy First Minister Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness, was refused bail in the High Court today – Mr Canning faces charges of causing grievous bodily harm, false imprisonment and possessing a gun with intent – on the grounds that Mr Justice Treacy was “satisfied there are substantial grounds for believing there is a risk of interference with witnesses”. The BBC’s online report doesn’t mention it but in the radio report there was a reference to statements from un-named “highly respected people” who, according to the defence solicitor, did not believe his client had committed the offences.

Mr Justice Treacy said the allegation was that Canning went to Mullingar and then brought the two people all the way to Derry for what amounted to a punishment shooting “which resulted in horrific injuries”. “I am refusing bail because I am satisfied there are substantial grounds for believing there is a risk of interference with witnesses,” he said.

, , , ,

  • typical

    In next week’s thrilling installment: Martin McGuinness’ postman’s aunt’s dog lifted dog warden. Tune in for more pointless inanity.

  • juan

    Of course, anyone suggesting that member of a Provisional Sinn Fein alligned Family commiting an act heavily associted with Provisional Sinn Fein and being refused bail for being sufficently suspected of undetaking actions heavily associated with the Provisional movement and which would require logistical facilitation by an underground terrorist movement should be dismissed as a hysterical scandal monger.

  • Dewi


    Is Mr Canning a member of Sinn Fein ?

  • juan

    “underground terrorist movement ” – could in some way be construed as having a role in a partially active terrorist movement – “should be dismissed as a hysterical scandal monger.”

  • typical

    The story is – Man doesn’t get bail.

    People not getting bail never features on Slugger.

    Unless it can be “Martin McGuinness relative in not getting bail shocker”

    It’s transparent buffoonery.

  • juan

    i fail to see how offical party membership could be relivent. Is he is a supporter or a contributor to the movement would be a more pertinant question.
    the actions of clandestine movements like Irish Republicanism, given thats its major body is outlawed, cannot be assertained simply by their
    offical records.

  • northsider

    require logistical facilitation by an underground terrorist movement should be dismissed as a hysterical scandal monger.

    And lo, one steps forward. You seem to know more than the cops.

    The court of Slugger must now be in session. Expect the foaming, frothing, fulminations of the feverish flag-biting recalcitrants (florid enough? trying to ape the style…) to fill up the page.

    Seems from the aforementioned, there new theme song should be less ‘There’ll Always Be An Ulster’, more ‘There’ll Always Be An IRA’ or ‘Provos On My Mind’.

    The guy has only appeared in court, however the jester above has him not only convicted and receiving help from the Provos, but suggests he has intelligence information denied to the DUP that said group are still ‘partially’ active.

    Are you sure it isn’t your insight and discernment that’s partially active?

  • juan

    It almost as if a man who is related to the leader of the republican family (recently split) and a former terrorist commander
    being arrested for a crime with all the hallmarks of a terrorist action (including logistical support according to the judge) is in some way a matter of public interest in a cease fire period ? but why typical, why ? slander is the only rational answer…….

  • circles

    Ach c’mon now Pete do we have to have this dance all over again?
    I know you tried last time (and failed) but could you please state clearly why this post is of relevance?
    I remember vaguely you suggested last time there was a problem with the morals of people who did not “get” this story – the thing is, I still don’t get it.
    OK so you tried to spice it up this time with nudge-nudge wink-wink “statements from un-named “highly respected people” ” (I wonder who on earth you want us to think this might be??), but its still a feeble attempt at whatever it might be you’re trying.

  • juan

    I am merely drawing attention to the remarkable symetry of the situation, the role of the jester being more to please his masters, your bristling dismissal of this remarkable and and heavily conotating event is eyebrow raising to say the least, it almost as if we reached the same conclusions and you are making rebuttels from political expediency, incidently if you check the Newspaper records and court records since the cease fire, the statement that the provisionals are partially active is a fact.

    I am not a judge and did not make any definitive statements as to this mans direct motives, i am merely drawing attention to the remarkable coherance in this big coincidence……

  • kensei

    “i fail to see how offical party membership could be relivent. Is he is a supporter or a contributor to the movement would be a more pertinant question. ”

    Eh? So an organisation is responsible for people with no formal links, but might just like them a bit?

    Excellent! We have now cleared up that the IFA is responsible to the death threats to Neil Lennon.

  • juan

    the distinction being that the threat was made by (a) supporter of a legal, regulated body rather than the brother in law of the (former) commander of an illegal unregulated organisation, so yes in that context offical records are of little value.

    it would be irresponsible to say this man is explicitly gulity of organised terrorism, it would be equally irresponsible to dismiss the heavy burden of suspicion of association could be dimissed, as i say if suspicion of guilt is politically motivated, at this stage, given the permamiters, the assertion of not guilty is equally so.

  • circles

    Juan, let me introduce you to a little friend of mine – you ready?
    Its called a full stop! Maybe you could try it out for size next time you post, and I might be able to follow what you’re saying.

  • circles

    and ahhh, whats a “permamiter”?

    Just asking like.

  • Jesus Pete!!!

    Last time you did a post on this, there seemed to be a general consensus that this had nothing to do with Martin McGuinness whatsoever. Other than the wider family link, this person has no links at all with Sinn Fein. Even the vast majority of our local newspapers gave this pretty scant mention last time around.

    Why on earth bring it all up again…??

    PS : I hear that McGuinness’ third cousin removed on his mother’s side got 3 penalty points for doing 48 mph down Shipquay Street last week…


  • DK

    MacSwiney – I think it is part of Sluggers move into more gossipy territory now that the big negotiations have died down. We have moved from the Peace Process to the Silly Season.

  • confused

    If there is a trial and until that trial is over the story is newsworthy, why else are so many people writing about the subject on this and previous threads.
    It is a story which has simply caught the imagination of the public.

  • circles

    hahahaha is that so confused? Really?
    It must be the glamour, the glitz and the sheer thrill of it all that did that then.
    Apparently the next big trial is Gerry A’s second cousin’s brother-in-law who has an extension without planning permission and is being pursued by his neighbours to remove it.

    Not all trials are newsworthy confused. Not even if you really want them to be.

  • insider

    The inside track on this firstly Marvin Canning has been a prominent member of the concerned republicans group recently formed in derry, he has never been a member of sinn fein and finally the dogs on the street know that the RIRA knecapped this guy for money. This is the second time they have done this sort of escapade in Derry.

    The RIRA in Derry need to disband for they bring nothing but shame on republicanism.

  • Confused

    “It is a story which has simply caught the imagination of the public”.

    Just a tad out of proportion that comment perhaps…?

  • confused

    To circles

    If Gerrys second cousins brother in law did what you suggest shame on him and I hope Gerry supports the neighbours to uphold the law which he acknowledges
    as being legitimate and recognises the Courts

  • circles

    Not only that – I hope Pete gets a hold of this story too and exposes the entire republican bloodline and even their distantrelatives for the shower of gawd dang cretins, villains and down-right disloyal miscreants that they are by simple virtue of wher they were born and who they married!!!!

  • Confused

    Mervyn Canning. He would be in the UDA. Is he related to Ken Maginness?

  • merrie

    Is Martin his brother-in-law’s keeper?

    Maybe you have a relative who is an alcoholic, Pete. How does that reflect upon you? For shame.

    This thread should not exist.

  • darth rumsfeld

    No comparison and you know it.

    First the alcoholic harms only himself and his immediate family, thus is no threat to society in general,unlike international kidnapping.

    Secondly, if Pete was, say Minister of Health, and a family member was alleged to be involved in something that arguably damaged health- say Militants for the Right to Smoke in Hospitals- clearly the family connection is newsworthy. Martin is part of the government, and thus obliged to uphold the rule of law. If a family member is proved to have a different view that’s news.

    Having said that, the PPS is notorious for chucking in every allegation possibly connected with the investigation at contested bail hearings, many of which never appear again.This is legally permissible because there is an obligation to charge early, and to have a bail hearing early, before corroborative evidence is available, but it does often sensationalise cases.

  • merrie


    Your response depresses me, it appears that for you – and Pete – the war is not over and you will fight it still using a relative’s alleged crimes as proxy.

    Being a relative or an in-law of someone accused of a crime is not a crime in itself. You obviously enjoy trial by blog and media.

    I only mentioned alcoholism rather than a crime as an example so as not to be too strong in the example.

    Just say one of your relatives or in-laws does a Cho or a kidnapping without your knowledge or consent?

    I would not hold it against you, but I hope you enjoy the publicity and the resultant shame such an event will bring upon you.