Liam Campbell cannot get a fair trial in Lithuania

Stop the extradition of Liam Campbell to Lithuaina

Liam Campbell, an alleged Real IRA leader, will argue that he cannot receive a fair trial in Lithuania because his brother’s terrorism conviction was found to have been based on entrapment.

Campbell, 54, of Upper Faughart in north Louth, who was found liable for the 1998 Omagh bomb in a civil action eight years ago, appeared in the High Court in Dublin yesterday to contest his extradition to Lithuania, where he is accused of a Real IRA plot to buy large quantities of explosives and weapons.

Brian Gageby, his barrister, told the court that he wanted an adjournment while he sought an English translation of Michael Campbell’s trial and appeal in Vilnius. Mr Gageby is preparing to argue that Liam Campbell cannot receive a fair trial, which is required under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Campbell’s brother was convicted in Lithuania in 2011 of conspiracy to buy weapons and explosives, following a joint MI5-Lithuanian police operation. Michael Campbell was jailed for twelve years but his conviction was overturned on appeal in 2013 on the grounds that he was entrapped by MI5. Liam Campbell is now seeking a transcript of that appeal to use in his case.

Since Michael Campbell returned to Ireland the highest court in Lithuania overturned the appeal, finding that the appeal court erred in putting too much weight on entrapment defence. As a result Michael Campbell may also be extradited back to Lithuania.

Judge Aileen Donnelly agreed to adjourn Liam Campbell’s case for a month yesterday to allow the state and the defence to prepare documents.

Campbell is receiving free legal aid to fight extradition, claiming that he will not get a fair trial and also that prison conditions in Lithuania are so bad that they violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article prohibits extradition if there is a “substantial risk” that the person will undergo inhumane or degrading treatment.

He won on Article 3 grounds when Lithuania sought to extradite him from Northern Ireland, after which he was released by the High Court in Belfast and was rearrested in the Republic. Campbell’s co-accused, Brendan McGuigan, 36, of Omeath, Co Louth, was previously released by the High Court in Dublin, also because prison conditions in Lithuania would be a violation of his rights under Article 3.

Both men are wanted in Lithuania for allegedly organising a Real IRA explosives and weapons importation scheme. A Lithuanian arrest warrant read in court states that Campbell “made arrangements for illegal possession of a considerable amount of powerful firearms, ammunition, explosive devices and substances” to be exported from Lithuania to Ireland for use by a “terrorist grouping”.

The cargo was allegedly to include sniper rifles, rocket launchers, RPG-7 rockets, hand-grenades and Semtex explosives.

Campbell was allegedly a senior Real IRA member when the offences were committed in late 2006 and early 2007 and is alleged to have met with a British intelligence officer posing as an east European arms dealer.

with many thanks to: Irish Republican Prisoner News.

LISTEN UP AS THIS COULD HAPPEN TO ANYONE’S CHILDREN !!

Brian Sheridan, Mallow, Fermoy and Middleton District Court. Ten of his maliciously created Court Orders. Have now been vacated as he erred in law.

Here’s how state kidnappers get away with kidnapping WELL CARED FOR kids for financial gain: 1 kid being kidnapped every 20 minutes:

Sean O’Donnabhain, Cork Circuit Court: Did’nt listen to anything this mother said, rather, He listened to the blatant lies from a Child and Family Agency

AN GARDA SIOCHANA abuse section 12 of CHILDCARE ACT 1991 to take kids and hand them to CHILD AND FAMILY AGENCY, previously HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE. Within section 12, AN GARDA SIOCHANA personnel HAVE TO HAVE reasonable grounds for believing that there is an immediate and serious risk to the health or welfare of a child

Richard Humphreys, High Court: Breached High Court Order and condoned Child and Family Agency falure to bring this mothers daughter to High Court and Child and Family Agency. Failure to provide documention to clarify the reason for the unlawful detention of this mothers daughter.

AND it would not be sufficient for the protection of the child from such immediate and serious risk to await the making of an application for an emergency care order by a HEALTH BOARD:

1. THIS MOTHER’S DAUGHTER WAS IN A SCHOOL IN SCHOOL HOURS

Seamus Noonan, High Court: Did’nt listen to anything this mother said, rather would believe the blatant lies by Child and Family Agency and ignore the mothers evidence that her seventeen year old daughter wishes to go home.

when MR GARY KINGSTON dressed in garda uniform chased her daughter around the school to abuse section 12 of this act to hand her to HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE on 21 March 2013 ….. SCHOOL STAFF HANDING HER OVER TO MR GARY KINGSTON WITHOUT QUESTION …. SO WHAT WAS THE ‘IMMEDIATE’ OR ‘SERIOUS RISK’???? NONE

Sean Ryan, President of Court of Appeal.

2. THIS MOTHER’S DAUGHTER WAS TAKEN TO KILLARNEY GARDA STATION BY MEN DRESSED IN GARDAI FANCY DRESS after this seventeen year old was recorded as ‘missing’ on AN GARDA SIOCHANA pulse records AFTER RUNNING AWAY FROM THREE STATE AGENT

Mary Irvine – A mother herself – Court of Appeal.

who orchastrated to take her into some supposed ‘care’: NOW KNOWN TO BE PLAIN CLOTHED GARDAI AND ANN COLLINS SOCIAL WORKER SIXTH ATTEMPT TO TAKE HER on 8 November 2016: WHEREBY GARDAI FORCIBLY TOOK THIS MOTHER AWAY FROM MY KIDS FOR NO JUSTIFIED OR LAWFUL REASON:

Michael Peart, Court of Appeal. Previously a High Court Judge: Who heard this mothers ‘Judicial Review’ and summarised: “This case relates to the ‘False Imprisonment and Torture of you” and six months later, without any disscussions regarding the ‘False Imprisonment’ or ‘Torture’ He referred to, He dismissed the ‘Judicial Review’ on the bizarre grounds that he “was satisfied that the Gary Doyle order was complete”: Where there was no more information provided by Garda than before: And information is still awaited today!

HEADBUTTING THE MOTHER’S HEAD OFF AN UNMARKED ALLEDGED ‘GARDA’ CAR – THIS MOTHER’S KIDS WITNESSING THIS – AND LEAVING THIS MOTHER’S KIDS IN A DARK ALLEY AT 8PM AT NIGHT

John Edwards: Court of Appeal.

WITH ANN COLLINS WHO THEN WALKED OFF…. ON 17 November 2016 this mother’s daughter was ‘found’ by gardai and taken to KILLARNEY GARDA STATION whereby MR JOHN RYAN,

Paul McDermott: Court of Appeal.

A sergeant gardai, abused section 12 of CHILDCARE ACT 1991 WITHOUT ANY OF THIS SEVENTEEN HAVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO SEE HER FAMILY SINCE

James O’Connor: Killarney District Court.

November 2016: merely using the poor excuse that THIS SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD ‘DIDN’T WANT TO RETURN HOME’!!! …. SO WHAT WAS THE ‘IMMEDIATE’ OR ‘SERIOUS RISK’ THIS TIME????? NONE

Francis Comerford, Tralee Circuit Court: Choose not to let Mr John Ryan, a Sergeant Gardai summoned to Circuit Court, into the witness box to clarify what, if any, were the ‘Reasonable Grounds’ for him believing that there is an immediate and serious risk to the health or welfare of this mother’s daughter and why, as she was in Killarney Garda Station. Did he not deem it would be sufficient for the protection of the child from such immediate and serious risk to await the making of an appliction for an emergancy care order by a Health Board? Mr John Ryan decided to get his barrister to find the loophole of some PAYMASTER Case to prevent him going into the witness box to clarify anything.

THIS MOTHER’S SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER HAS NOW RUN OFF FROM STATE ABUSIVE ‘CARE’ FOR A FORTH TIME … SHE WANTS TO COME HOME, BUT CORRUPT POOR EXCUSE FOR ‘JUDGES’ STOP HER:

BRIAN SHERIDAN, MALLOW DISTRICT COURT, SEAN O’DONNABHAIN, CORK CIRCUIT COURT, RICHARD HUMPHREYS, HIGH COURT, SEAMUS NOONAN, HIGH COURT, SEAN RYAN, COURT OF APPEAL, MARY IRVINE – A MOTHER HERSELF – COURT OF APPEAL, MICHAEL PEART, COURT OF APPEAL, JOHN EDWARDS, COURT OF APPEAL, PAUL MCDERMOTT, COURT OF APPEAL, JAMES O’CONNOR, KILLARNEY DISTRICT COURT and FRANCIS COMERFORD, TRALEE CIRCUIT COURT: ALL ELEVEN POOR EXCUSE FOR ‘JUDGES’ IGNORE HER WRITTEN WISHES THAT SHE WANTS TO COME HOME???

SO NOW THIS MOTHER’S SEVENTEEN YEAR OLD HAS RUN OFF FROM THE CONSTANT ABUSE IN STATE SUPPOSED ‘CARE’

With many thanks to: Sally Smith & Brian Sheridan for the origional story.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1991/act/17/section/12/enacted/en/html

Flag protester Jamie (Provo Bhoy) Bryson wants his bail conditions relexed !!!

LEADING loyalist flag protester (and poster boy) Jamie Bryson is to aa play to have his bail conditions relaxed so he can attend further protests and speak at demonstrations.

MEANWHILE IN SOUTH ARMAGH !

Mr Bryson (23), will a play to Belfast Magistrates Court today in a bid to be aallowed to attend a protest against a contentious republican march through Castlederg in Co Tyrone later this month. His friend pastor Mark Gordon said Mr Bryson expects his application will be refused and if so he will a play to the High Court. “Police seem to want to drag this out as long as they possibly can. In the meantime they expect Jamie to sit on his hands and remain silent,” he said. “I think the time has come when he cannot reasonably be expected to do it any longer, especially given the current circumstances within the pProvence.”

POLICE FAIL IN BID TO STOP BALLYMURPHY SEVEN CASE !

MEN ACQUITTED OF 1991 BOMB ATTACK

SEEK COMPENSATION !!!

POLICE failed yesterday in a bid to halt a High Court action by seven men acquitted of a paramilitary attack on a joint police and British army patrol in Belfast 21 years ago.

A judge refused to dismiss the claim for damages after ruling that a delay in issuing proceedings has not prejudiced the defendant. A test case brought by Danny Petticrew, one of the so-called Ballymurphy Seven, will now proceed to a full trial. Mr Petticrew (37) is seeking compensation for wrongful detention, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution over a bomb attack on an RUC and military patrol near the city’s Springfield Road in August 1991.

The West Belfast man, then aged 17, was taken to Castlereagh Holding (interrogation) Centre and, along with his co – accused, were later charged with offences including attempted murder. He was held in custody from April 1992 until September 1994 nearly two & half years. The case against him was discharged at trial on the basis that alleged admissions could not be used in evidence against him. Mr Petticrew claims his arrest was deliberately delayed and, because of his youth and vulnerability, he was unable to withstand questioning during repeated police interviews. He said that officers knew he was making false, unreliable and involuntary statements.

Lawyers for the chief constable applied to have the civil action thrown out due to the delay in bringing it. But Mr Justice Gillen yesterday refused their appeal against a decision not to grant the application. He accepted there had been ” inexcusable and inordinate delay ” in bring the case. However, the judge held that available transcripts from the original criminal trial, togeather with legal notes, meant defendant witnesses were in no more difficult a position now than if the claim had been brought in 1994.

” I am conscious that the allegations in this case amount to serious charges against persons and authorities within the state who are bound by laws publicly made and administered in the courts,” Mr Justice Gillen said. ” They amount to an assault on the rule of law if they are true and an affront to public  conscience. ” In those circumstances courts should be particularly cautious before driving from the seat of judgement those who wish to litigate such matters.”

Dismissing the police application, the judge said: ” The balance of justice lies in allowing such matters to proceed to trail if at all possible, so long of course as the defendant is not deprived of any realistic chance of defending the allegations due to the delay.” Outside the court Mr Petticrew expressed satisfaction that the actions brought by him and his six co-accused will go ahead. ” Something that happened 21 years ago is still having a massive effect on our lives today,” he said.

WITH MANY THANKS TO : IRISH NEWS.

BID TO NAME MAN WHOSE GUN WAS TAKEN AWAY FAILS !

BRITISH COULUMBIA 1919 ---OFFICIAL FIREARMS LI...
BRITISH COULUMBIA 1919 —OFFICIAL FIREARMS LICENSE (Photo credit: woody1778a)

THE Sunday World newspaper has failed in an unprecedented legal bid to be able to name a man whose personal protection weapon was taken from him.

The High Court refused the newspaper’s application to set aside an anonymity order surrounding the man’ identified only as JR20. A judge held that publishing his name could increase the threat he was said to be under because it would also reveal that he no longer had a gun. The attempt to set aside the anonymity order is believed to be the first of its kind in Northern Ireland. A ban on naming JR20 was imposed during his unsuccessful challenge to the secretary of state’s decision to revoke his firearms licence.

It was granted on the basis of a risk to his life,assessed by the police and the security services as being ” moderate”. Despite having no involvement in his original judicial review case, The Sunday World’s publishers intervened to seek permission to identify him. Olivia O’Kane, for the newspaper, argued that such proceedings remained open and public and should be reported.

However, Mr Justice Weatherup ruled that anonymity order should remain in place. His decision was based on grounds of common-law, fairness , rather than JR20’s right to life, which, on the basis of a moderate threat assessment, did not meet the necessary threshold. Balancing open justice with reporting of legal proceedings against the man’s safety,the judge concluded that information which would identify him should not be published. Al through the challenge was unsuccessful, it has been interpreted as  being a precedent for further more interventions.

Dissidents in jail after judicial review

Five dissident republican suspects have gone back to prison after they challenged police moves to take them directly for questioning about other terrorist offences.

Dissidents in jail after judicial review

The judge dismissed the judicial review. (© UTV)

The men launched High Court proceedings following their transfer from Maghaberry Prison to Antrim Serious Crime Suite.

They are currently being held on remand in Roe House, along with other republican prisoners.

But on Wednesday the men were taken out of the prison to be interviewed in connection with allegations of preparing for acts of terrorism.

Police lawyers say the PSNI were granted permission to have the men taken out of Roe House.

The men, who all face other terrorist-related charges, sought an emergency judicial review. They argued that authorisation is required from a magistrate before police can take remand prisoners for further questioning.

Frank O’Donoghue QC, for the suspects, told the court on Thursday: “This is about the removal of prisoners from detention.

“It’s now done very strictly, we say, under judicial scrutiny once the person is charged.”

Paul McLaughlin, for the PSNI, told the court that the men had been arrested.

But following a break in proceedings judges were told a decision has been taken to return them to Maghaberry “for the time being”.

Mr McLaughlin added: “Thereafter police will decide what course to follow to continue their investigation.

“But for the present purposes the return of the prisoners to Maghaberry brings an end to the case.”

Lord Justice Higgins, sitting with Mr Justice Stephens, decided the case should then be dismissed.

Outside the court the men’s solicitor, Paul Pierce of Kevin R Winters and Co, said the case was taken to examine the procedures surrounding the decision to take the prisoners directly to a police station.

He added: “Our concerns have been vindicated in view of the fact that the police have decided to return each of the men to custody and they have indicated they will now review their position.

“The method by which these prisoners were produced is clearly open to abuse by any police officers who want to use a power which is not subject to any form of judicial scrutiny or legal restraint.”

WITH MANY THANKS TO :  UTV News NI.