Sue Ramsey, a clarification and apology…

It’s been a tumultuous week in Northern Irish politics. And whilst I’m prepared to stand over most things we write here, I don’t mind taking correction in the interests of truth and accountability.

Late last week I received a letter from Sue Ramsey pointing to an ambiguous section of text in my first post on the Spotlight programme. I’ve since amended that section so as to make it absolutely clear that Ms Ramsey was not one of those whose names appeared to the writ moved to close the programme down.

It was not my intention to suggest that Ms Ramsey had taken the writ against the programme. And I apologise if it caused her any distress at what is clearly a difficult time for her.

Sometimes we do get things wrong. But if we’re to stand over the play the ball not the man ethic of the site it has to include me as well as all of those commenting on the site. I hope this is taken in the good faith in which it is offered.

  • Glenn Clare

    Now that she has cleared that up, can Sue Ramsey clear up the question around her knowing of Ms Cahill’s sexual abuse and subsequent sinn fein/ira illegal investigation?

  • Jag

    Hi Mick, are you able to report the names of the people who did in fact seek to injunct the programme.

    Also, do you know if, in fact, Gerry Adams has initiated proceedings against the BBC. This report by Niall O’Dowd at Irish Central claims he has.

    “The idea of Adams suggesting that Mairia was manipulated into liking the abuse has drawn an especially strong reaction from the Sinn Fein leader who has commenced legal action against the BBC program “Spotlight” which allowed such an allegation.”

    http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/niallodowd/Latest-media-attack-on-Gerry-Adams-fails-the-reality-test.html

  • mickfealty

    My understanding is that it was one of the accused. Multiple names was a rumour. As for Adams action, Id wait to see what comes out in the wash. I recommend reading the recent judgement against the Indo and in favour of SF to see a good example of a recent legal success.

  • Jag

    “legal success” Mick?
    Are you referring to the (ROI) Press Ombudsman upholding a complaint by GA that the Indo mis-characterised a communication by GA to the Indo as an attempt to “gag” the Indo? And in the same ruling, the Ombudsman dismissed GA’s complaint about bias. And the Indo didn’t even apologise despite GA claiming the Indo had been “forced to apologise” and the Indo then went on to squeeze a few articles out of it and then claim credit for its anti-SF stance in the week the Mairia Cahill story broke. That would be a “legal defeat”, would it?

  • mickfealty

    Yep. There’s a detailed piece on the Indo site on that matter…

  • Granni Trixie

    Mick: Thank you for putting the record straight and Sue Ramsey was quite right to request that you did so.

    However, this fact was not the reason many, myself included, were disappointed to find from Spotlight that Ramsey as one of the perceived good guys in SF appears to have questions to answer as regards how she dealt with knowledge of the young Mairias rape.
    That brings me to my next point having just listened to Jennifer McCann who throughout the Nolan interview today could not bring herself to say the word RAPE – always using the term “sexual abuse” as she attempts to place this case within the ‘normality’ of “we know 1 in 4 will be abused” and within narratives concerning historical institutional abuse.
    This SF tactic follows their other well established approach in such cases which is to SOUND sympathetic to their accuser whilst at the same time trying (in faux sympathetic tones) to explain the victims truth away by constant reference to their mental state, alcoholism or both.If people from WB fall for this guff they deserve the politicians they get.
    Jennifer McCann can keep digging but does herself no favours as she sounds totally unconvincing. Sue Ramsey however exercises good judgement in staying out of the indefencable.

  • chrisjones2
  • chrisjones2

    You need to realize the reality….within SF women really DONT count that much. Its all big boys rules and big boys rule. With few exceptions the women (and many of the men) are just there for the optics

  • NMS

    Sue Ramsey disappears off stage, but yet her role in the cover up has not been explained. I presume her sore face means she won’t be telling us her story.

    Can I refer people to last night’s Prime Time and Jennifer McCann’s destruction by Prof. Ivana Bacik? http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/10335963/

    Ms McCann is of course another serious criminal who is now a politician. She tried to murder a member of the RUC, the body she and her buddies say they told Ms Cahill to contact. All this to protect Adams, it just gets more and more surreal

  • Dixie Elliott

    The Adamsite fanatics are desperately trying to use Kincora as a stick with which to beat Mairia Cahill….

    andrew mccartney retweeted
    Squinter @squinteratn · 11h 11 hours ago
    Asked to meet Enda Kenny at 2pm, Michéal Martin at 2.30pm and Peter Robinson at 3pm to discuss Kincora decision. They’ll come, won’t they?

    Sean McMonagle @SeanMcMonagle1 · 1h 1 hour ago
    “@PaulClark_UTV: The Public Prosecution Service will review three cases linked to the alleged rape of Maíria Cahill… ‪#‎utvl2n‬” not Kincora!

  • NMS

    Yes, in the same way they all religiously retweeted a link to the Adams’ blog. Peadar Tóibín went so far as to describe it as, “Very interesting analysis from Gerry Adams on the legacy of Sexual Abuse from the conflict in the north” It gets more pathetic by the day. They are also tweeting against Fintan O’Toole. That may just add to their problems.

  • Croiteir

    Well it does show the dbl standards in that the British are not being pilloried to the same extent, a pilloring I support, that SF are getting. Even though it is nothing more than a diversion.