The Case of the Belfast Ten

THE CASE OF THE

BELFAST

TEN

BY DAVID MARTIN

A FREE IRELAND PAMPHLET 10p.

a )_ Introduction Over the last four years, following in an old English tradition of the use of spies, agents-provocateurs, judicial manipulation and sheer brutality which has always marked English rule in Ireland, a series of political trials has taken place in.Britain in which Irish defendants have been handed out heavy prison sentences in return for the "crime" of having opposed British Imperialism.

These trials, which now total over thirty, are, of course, only part of the total repression of Irish opposition to British rule - there are for instance hundreds of men Fie ge ae without charge or trial in the Six Counties fe) reland, However, the new danger which faces us is that these men and women will be "forgotten" once they go inside. There is, after all, no such thing as a political prisoner under English law, and, with the heartfelt co-operation of judges, juries, and lawyers, the courts have been able to convict on a minimum of material evidence and a maximum of political predjudice. In some cases, especially those involving conspiracy charges, no crime of any sort has actually taken place, So Eamonn Smullen was given 8 years in February 1970 for conspiracy to purchase arms when there were no arms and the"arms dealer" was an acknowledged police informer.

In the"Hackney Arms Case" in June 1972, the police had to drop charges because, admitted John Parker, another agent-provocateur, the arms they were supposed to have stolen came from police stores. John Parker was recognised by Noel Jenkinson as being one of those responsible for his sentence of thirty years; Parker and the fact that the prosecution was allowed by the judge to parade Noel's communist literature before the jury. Charged with 'conspiracy to cause a public mischief', Noel's "motive" for causing the Aldershot explosion was said by the prosecution to be due to his communist ideology, and the judge underlined this by asking him about his working class sympathies.

Defendants have however, been prevented from making political defenses. They have been prevented from drawing to the attention of juries the brutalities of the British Army and the R.U.C. in the six counties. The judge in the trial of James Moore stopped him with the words, "This isn't a political trial". Yet the judge in the trial of Pat O'Sullivan and Conor Iynch compared them to Barnes and McCormack and suggested that he was going to give them avery heavy sentence to dter another bombing cempaign, and

-~2. the judge at the end of the trial of Joe Farrington was careful to remind the jury that Joe was a Catholic and "a sympathiser with the minority people in Ulster."

In all the trials the police have deliberately created an atmosphere of public hysteria by their so-called ‘security precautions', armed police and Special Branch, snipers, dogs, visitors searched, defendants handcuffed in the dock, bail refused. In the case of Caroline Reneghan and James Sweeney in Glasgow earlier this year, the police created an atmosphere of terror at the trial of these two "IRA bombers", while the local papers ran riot breaking all the sub-judice rules. The two Orangemen, Campbell and Martin, tried in the same city for actually causing an explosion, and one of whom had a criminal record, were tried in an atmosphere far quieter and given the same sentances as the first two offenders, . who were only charged with possession.

Predjudice and bias against Irish working class defendants is apparent in this whole sickening tale of the operation. of"British justice", is apparent in every case which has been before the courts. We should now cease to expect a "fair trial" from the British capitalist class and demand like Marx, who last century led a campaign for the release of the Fennians, the release of all Irish political prisoners who are now serving heavy prison sentences, they are the victims of the real conspiracy concocted by the Secret Police, the Tory Government and the Ministry of Defense in order to prevent the growth of the movement which will inevitably bring to an end the long and bloody history of the British occupation of Ireland.

Jaqueline Kaye

HEKKEKKKKHHKHKE

=—5= | 2. The Case of the Belfast Ten By DAVE MARTIN

KHKKEKKKKEE

Shortly after 11.00pm on Thursday 8th March this year, the day of the futile Northern Border Poll and the occasion of Liam Cosgrove's first London visit as Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister) for. "consultations with Edward Heath, ten young Belfast people were taken at gunpoint airplanes bound for Belfast and Dublin from London Heathraw Airport. They were all taken totally incommunicado to Ealing Police Station, which was immediately turned into a police fartress, where some of them were to meet each other for the first time, and where they were eventually to be told abnut two car bombs which had exploded in London that afternnon. The first was just off Whitehall at 2.40 and the other outside the Old Bailey just after 3.00; two more were found and defused, one early in the morning outside New Sentland Yard which a police spokesman at the time confidentially said, "...we would not complain if you associated this with the IRA..." In short, they added up to what the "Irish Press" described as the "New Blitz of London", and which every national British newspaper screamed in its headlines "IRA atrocities", and the Special Branch, not to mention the Bomb Squad, just had to be seen to be detaining the people responsible. Who better than ten young people all with addresses in the anti-Unionist areas of Belfast, and acting on nods and winks, they were soon dubbed as "IRA bombers", and their persecution had begun, They were to remain completely isolated in Ealing for four days, denied access to solicitors, relatives, anyone except the Special Branch heavies who brought all their subtlety to bear on the victims. The Ten had all their possessions removed, clothes taken away, leaving only blankets to wear, and endured many hours of intense interogations. - The pressure inside was more than enough to break anyone, and the witchunt outside, primarily through the media, had them permanently branded in the public eye as responsible for the bombs. The quaint legal jargon for such a long and

~ unremitting detention is "helping the police in their enquiries", and it emerged there was.no time restriction in British.law which stipulates that people must be charged, during which time they are technically not under arrest, thus even the minimal rights of an arrested person did not apply. It might be worth notingthat under Northern Ireland's Special Powers Act, a person must be charged within 72 hours. However, in this case, even after this time, public opinion had been so moulded, that there was not even a "liberal" outcry for, at the least, habeus corpus.

After these four long days in police cells and following pressure from political groups and the National Council for Civil Liberties, they were all charged with "conspiring to cause explosions likely to endanger life or cause serious damage to property", by which time their names had been disclosed. ’ They were: RIOSIN McNEARNEY 18 WILLIAM McLARNON 19

ROBERT WALSH 24

GERARD KELLY 19 :

MARTIN BRADY 22

WILLIAM ARMSTRONG 29

HUGH FEENEY 21

DOLORES PRICE 22

MARION PRICE 19

PAUL HOLMES 19

The mother of the Price sisters still had not been allowed to see them, and she maintained an overnight vigil outside Ealing Police Station, ' She was still to be denied access to her daughters for three days, and even after that time, she could not see them together or without the close attentions of an unwanted police"guard" keeping an obtrusive presence with radar-like ears,

5= Their physical condition was particularly distressing for their mother; Dolores especially had clearly received rough treatment,.as. did Hugh Feeny, during the Ealing "interrogations" and.was still not allowed her own clothes, The police security performance for the Ten's first remand hearing at Bow Street magistrates' court on 13 March gave press photographers all they required to meet their newspaper editors' orders for splashes on the"IRA bombers". The melodromatic security blanket further intensified the growing public bloodlust, at the time calling for treason charges and even capital punishment, and it was against this background that the Belfast Ten Defense Committee was set up to counteract the flood of bile.

If it needed proving, the principle of innocence till the establishment of guilt, was finally and for ever proved meaningless in highly charged political cases when conviction is desparately required. All ten appeared in Bow Street individually handcuffed as well as each having an armed cscort, and it was revealed that they were all beinz held in the maximum security wing of Brixton prison, the first time women have been kept there, under Category A security conditions.

Bernadette McAliskey MP was not allowed to raise the issue of their conditions of detention in Brixton as a Parliamentary question, following her visit there on 23rd March, because it was decreed "sub judice", that time honoured British method of stifling protest, no matter how justified. Bernadette confirmed that while in Ealing the fen had to spend the first 24 hours, and longer, with only blankets to keep themselves warm, On their third remand appearance on 27th March an offer of bail an accomodation from Bernadette McAliskey as well as from novelist Edna O'Brien and Actress Vanessa Redgrave was turned down after Det. Chf. Insp. George Mould, a key police figure in political persecutions, had told the court that there was "abundant evidence to show that the defendants were staff members of the IRA. He also said that they had. come to London "for the specific purpose of planting four bombs", which was naturally more than sufficient for them to be returned to the gloom of Brixton.

The remand hearing on 3rd April was. held at Lambeth. Magistrates' court, the move being made for "security reasons", and agian bail was immediately refused, and committal proceedings being fixed for May. fhey were taken pack to Brixton in a van Shat only cattle being carried for slaughter would regard as luxurious, but prison visits by relatives and friends were all refused even though they were

-6still only on remand. Standard letters sent out by Brixton's Governor all had as their headings "IRA Prisoners", a further demonstration of the perverse justice that the Ten were receiving. Weekly picket. were then begun by the Belfast Ten Defense Committee, but the gross restrictions on visitors remained in force.

Suddenly, on Friday 13th April, in a nationwide series of Special Branch dawn raids, twelve people, including one Catholic priest in Coventry were arrested and many papers and documents were removed from over 100 homes.

Coventry was the worst hit, and seven from that town face conspiracy trial in Birmingham Crown Court in the second week of this October. The reasons were said to be searches for evidence connected with the car bombs, but clearly the police were still capitalising on the general backlash and the bombs were only the excuse for a general information gathering session. Anyway, if the police were so positive of a conviction for the Ten, it was somewhat late to search for evidence to supportthe charges. The raids were a warning, an act of intimidation to deter the growing organised resistance to the gross miscarriages of justice the Belfast Ten were suffering.

DIVIDE_AND RULE

Reports of individual harassment and aggravations came out during this empty period awaiting committal proceedings, while the Ten ingered isolated by the restrictions on visits, letters and newspapers.

William Armstrong, the eldest of the Ten, had a three day stretch of solitary confinement, denied both clothing and bedding, and allowed only bread and water. This morale-breaking attempt resulted from an exercise yard incident when he was called an "Irish animal" by a warder who in retaliation was called an "English bastard".

Fifteen male inmates of Brixton faced disciplinary sessions because of their constant barracking of the three Belfast girls, the only women in the prison, during their exercise period, and one of them indecently expose himself to the girls, all adding up to a humiliating process. The elderly aunt and uncle of William Armstrong who had travelled all the way down from Derby were bluntly refused permission to visit. him on 12 May. “The most blatant morale-crushing move, however, came

if. on 15 May when the Ten were broken up with William McLarnon being sent to Wormwood Scrubs and Riosin McNearney to - Holloway. McLarnon was initially told that he was to be moved, but not told where. Then, he was told Crumlin Road before ending up in the Top Security Wing of Wormwood Serubs, normally only for convicted prisoners, anddenied association with any of the other occupants, He soon expressed, through a freind, his strong desire to return to Brixton, but to no avail, and since then he has suffered from violent stomach aches and fits of severe depression. Riosin McNearney was told that morning she was to be taken to a dentist, even though she had not requested such a visit, and two hours later, she found herself in Holloway, deprived of the consoling friendship of the Price sisters in Brixton. With the committal proceedings due the next week beginning 21 May, the sinister reason for these moves came to light, with the police unofficially putting out the malicious slur that these two had made incriminating statements. McLarnon immediately denied this, again through a friénd, also that he had been separated from the others "for his own safety". Riosin McNearney similarly adamantly denied this + rumour and wrote in a letter, "I never made any such statement as there was nothing to make a statement about, as we are all innocent." Riosin was naturally desparately worried a tried to get her message through to Dolores and Marion rice, : Her and McLarnon are the youngest of the Ten, and thus the mostlikelyto be frightened into providing prosecution evidence, which was obviously, even at this late stage, thin on the ground. By breaking up the Ten, so shortly before the committal proceedings, a vicious blow was intentionally dealt to their solidarity and morale.

' _ By passing round rumours of incriminating statements, it was clearly intended to implant doubt and resenttng ge those who were actively campaigning on behalf O e Ten. _ All attempts to mow down the resistance of the Belfast Ten by the demoralising prison conditions had failed badly, and now it appeared that the committal proceedings were to be opened by a classic case of "divide and rule" by the police endevouring to turn them against each other.

-§- It seemed that the prosecution case was about to usethese supposed incriminating statements in the absence of real evidence, to secure the conviction so much demanded by political expediency and public opinion carefully and deliberately moulded by the national news media, As Riosin wrote in her letter; "they have nothing against us, so they are going to frame us only using me and Liam along with it." On 20 May, over-300 people attended a successful march organisea by the Defense Committe, demanding the immediate release of the Ten, a march that had in attendence both Special Branch photographers and agents provocateurs.

Solidarity outside Brixton Prison was expressed by Capt.

James Kelly, of the Irish Civil Rights Association, speakers from every Irish organisation, from the Stoke Newington Five Defense Committee, and the Black Panthers also addressed the march. The powerful effect of this rally outside Brixton Prison also uplifted other occupants who conveyed their greetings through prisonbars, as well as the eight 1éft in Brixton of the Belfast Ten on the eve of their appearance at Lambeth for committal to trial.

COMMITTAL AT LAMBETH

‘These proceedings opened on 21st May to a full prosecution fanfare, with the British Press, those tireless searchers after the truth, assembled en masse already preparing their splash features under such headings as Where the IRA bombers went wrong", ie. working from presuppositions. and after only the meat to hang on to the bones.

The Ten had by now been in detention for over two months, and the security precautions outside Lambeth, reminiscent of. some wartime Army manoeuvre, left on-lookers in no doubt that the prosecution anticipated a conviction, State counsel Mr. Ian Kennedy opened at a high pitch saying he intended to show the four car bombs were the "products of one plot and the work of a single group of plotters", Kennedy then spent most of the first day seemingly content to string together a series of facts to show that the Ten were in London at the relevant time.

From this, he sketched Republican backgrounds, sufficient to substanciate the impressions already implanted in the minds of any likely jury who would therefore not fail to convict just on circumstantial evidence.

au. When you're already presumed guilty and when you're ' Charged with something so vague as conspiracy, so difficult to disprove, you don't stand much of a chance, given the © political prejudice you will inevitably encounter.

The outline of the prosecution case suggested that a group were noticed being given orders in Heathrow Airport at 10.45 that morning of the 8th March, after which they split up to board different airoplanes. They were arrested and then at Ealing, Riosin McNearney was said to have given detailed incriminating statements, with Kennedy claiming Riosin had admitted to being in London on "business connected with the IRA," Despite both McLarnon's and Riosin's firm denials of such statements they were clearly being used as the Lynch -pins in the prosecution case which otherwise would have to rely on a string of dubious and unconnected facts.

The reason for their being moved the previous week, and for the rumours being spread that these moves were "for their own safety", were again emphasised as attempts to break morale, The warm reception upon reunion given to the two in the dock by the other eight put lie to the malicious prosecution tactics. This charade of justice at Lambeth continued for nearly two weeks, as the prosecution had managed to find themselves over 40 witnesses to give some kind of plausability to its case, and the predictable outcome was duly reached on 4th June.

During proceedings, relatives and friends of the Ten had to suffer further humiliations which co-incided with the arrival amongst court security police of an Irish born member of the British Special Branch. All women visitors to the public gallery were then subjected to "strip searches" which bluntly means that you are forced to take off every item of clothing and undergo an ee detailed personal examination. Two babies being taken into court were even obliged to have their nappies removed and then be examined. As the Special Branch officer explained; "If anyone wanted to bring in explosives, they would do it this way."

The magistrate, Sir "rank Milton, who holds the magnificent title of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, naturally refused to intervene, and the whole distressing business was seen as yet another attempt to discourage relatives and friends from giving whatever moral support they could.

The Ten were duly returned for trial, bail yet again refused under any circumstances, but, as if conviction

-10was not already inevitable, the State made doubly sure of ‘getting their sacrificial victims by staging the show trial at Winchester in sleepy Hampshire, instead of at the Old Bailey, in the vicinity of which the relevant explosions took place, Sir Frank Milton even tried to make this switch of location sound like a favour to the Ten by remarking, "If I thought that it would in any way prejudice the é¢ase to move it outside London, I would not agree to this move."

The nature of justice in Winchester is well defined by such recent examples as. the discharge given to Tory M.P. Sir Gerrald Nabarro over his dangerous driving charge - whcih' lead even him to remark afterwards that the law favoured the rich - and the vicious sentences meted out to the three Irishmen ececused of the Aldershot blast.

The London based Prisoners Aid Committee were totally accurate when they said the "once again, the British Government has demonstrated its willingness to manipulate judicial proceedings in the interests of- political expediency." Despite the successful completion of stage two in their persecution, the Ten, back in their three prisons, were still subjected to harsh conditions of detention and severe restrictions on their mail. Letters sent by Roy Walsh to his sister in Belfast were in fact received by her still unsealed, and undoubtedly read by numerous people whilst in transit. The eight in Brixton complained bitterly about the treatment meted out to them by one particular prison officer, through whose influence they were being kept locked up in their individual cells virtually all day without even the ~ three hour exercise period. Complaints about this officer to the prison governer were to no avail, as such written «© complaints had to be directed through the very officer who naturally refused to pass them on.

Quite separate from Lambeth and Brixton, another nail was hammered into the Ten's coffin on the 8th of June.

Despite extensive medical evidence that the one man who died shortly after the Old Bailey blast, Mr. Frederick Milton, in fact suffered from a near-fatal heart condition, which had led to the Director of Public Prosecutions witholding murder charges, a coroners jury in London decided that Mr.

Milton had been “unlawfully killed with malice"; bluntly, murdered. . This verdict was reached in the face of an authoritive statement at the original inquest by a Professor

-11- Keith Simpson, who said, "there was nothing from my examination that I could connect with any recent event which could have disturbed him physically or mentally.”

An inconvenient statement, of course, for the prosecution, and one that for the sake of political expedience, had to be discarded, as it was, The jury reached their verdict after only fifteen minutes, clearly reacting to the emotional undertones, despite being told by the coroner, Dr. David Paul, that they must deal solely with medical evidence, which, virtually, unanimously, had indicated Mr. Milton had a previously unsuspected heart disease, Although the jury's verdict didnot name anyone, there is now a clear possibility that the DPP could introduce murder charges when the Winchester trial opens, either against all Ten, or against certain individuals.

Even if he does not, the murder verdict will be lurking in the background when evidence is given and will undoubtedly be used in the prosecution case in a subtle manner as an emotional leve?.

Either way, the verdict of the coronerd jury in the face of strong and well-documented evidence to the contrary does not auger well, in terms of prejudice, for decisions reached by a Winchester trial jury.

The prophetic message of this inquest is abundantly clear, showing that English juries trying Irish people on political charges, are not interested so much in the actual evidence against them, as the following of their overriding prejudices, and accordingly returning the desired "guilty" Verdicts. A bad Omen indeed for the Winchester trial.

aes (i ae _ All the while, the tide of repression against the Trish in“Lritéin who are aware, has continued earnestly, with the Special Branch exploiting public opinion for all it's worth. The case of the Coventry Seven is only the most obvious, as the police rampage proceeds apace at every level, publicised and unpublicised.

Apart from the continued scurrilous Press stories on the subject, to which at least we have become thoroughly accustomed, all Irish meetings, gatherings, demonstrations, conferences and the like have been subjected to various degrees of consistent harrassment.: Three Irishmen in Blackburn have been arrested and charged with overt Republican activities; two Irishmen in the famovs open space “free speech" area of Speakers’ Corner, Hyde: Park, have been charged with assaulting policemen and creating obstruction.

One Dubiin man, Gerry Harte, has suffered much interference with his normal iife by being arrested in Liverpool last April, then takeh on a dubious RUC warrant to Belfast, then sent back to Liverpool, re-arrested and only recently. released, with a heavy fine.

Izishmen in Glasgow end Manchester have felt the full effect of this police backlash, The Irishman inflicted. with the most vicious judicial assasination in most recent years, Noel Jenkinson, serving at least a 50 year sentence in Leicester Prison, was refused even leave to appeal on 18th of June this year against his conviction and sentence,and now, as far as British justice is concerned, his case is closed virtually for ever, The most obvious example of police activity and how orgenised resistance can work,is the case of Celia Holt who was taken to Derry on 2nd July to face a puny cheque ~ fraud charge. Prior to Derry, howver, she spent two days in London prisons, and had all ner political literature and collecting boxes pertaining to the Belfast Ten Defense Committee, of which she is a member, taken away from her Islington flat. Oniy immediate reaction from the Defense Committee, the Prisoners Aid Committee, and the National Council for Civil Liberties, resulted in her soon returning to London, though not without a suspeided sentence, which of course is intended to be a deterrent to anyone involved in political

atx activities. ; : i i i an be . , More of this kind of police harrassment c — nd ici ad while Irish people dare to speak up in e very ite eee monster agatnat British Imperialism and its disgusting methods in Ireland.

Just recently, we heave had the revalations of the Littlejohn sagawith all its major implications. If the British Ministry of Defense cen publicly admit to having employed convicted English criminals to perform dirty tricks as "agents provocateurs" in .Ireland, what else do we not know about British policies?

: Who was behind the Dublin bombs last December that killed three. people and immediately brought in the repress- ‘ive anti-Republican legislation contained in the Offences against the State (Amendments) Act?

Who was behind the murder, deliberate and coldblooded, of an unarmed Joe McCann in the Markets area of Belfast in April last year, on whom an"open verdict" was returned by a Belfast coroners court last June?

There are many similar incidents both in Ireland and in Britain, that should be re-interpreted in the light of the Littlejohn revelations, which have shown only too clearly the blatant hypocrisy of a"decent fair-play" British Government, We may further, with not alittle justification, ask questions about both the Aldershot and Old Bailey bombings.

After the Littlejohn saga can we beleive anything from the pious, well-educated mouths of Her Majesty's Government's participants, spokesmen and public relations experts?

Back to the Belfast Ten. Their ill-treatment in Brixton continues and intensifies, and they have nothing immediate to look farward to apart from an armed military escort to Winchester, presumably early one Monday morning, to await their "trial", To illustrate that there is nothing new in the treatment and thetrial of the Belfast Ten, we need only refer to the 1916 trial of Roger Casement on a high treason charge;'whilst.of course realising different circumstances prevailed in that Britain was at war with Germany.

From the moment of his arrest, Casement was branded by the popular press in their headlines and stories as a "traitor", so that the British public, not to mention the trial jury, were well-convinced long in advance of the Old Bailey of his guilt. t Ea

-14- Even an impartial observer of Casement! i remarked chat the atmosphere reminded him of ihe eowtay sherriff S words to the lynch party, "Now: boys, lets give him a real nice trial before we hang him," Even the London Times" stated that the trial could only have one outcome, The presiding Lord Cheif Justice certain i Casement's jury before retiring to consider tnais Gene to banish from their minds anything they may have read or.

heard outside the courtroom, but they were back within the hour with their inevitable decision.

As Casement said in his stupendous speech from the dock with words that stand true today, and will forever until Ireland is again her own, "Judicial assassination ay is reserved only for one race of the King's subjects, for -rishmen, for those who cannot forget theirallegance to the real of Ireland. In Ireland alone in this twentyth century is loyalty held to be a crime.

If we are to be indicted as common criminals, to be shot as murderers, to be imprisoned as convicts, because our offense is that we love Ireland more than we value our lives, then I know not what virtue resides in any offer of self-government held out to brave men on such terms."

No matter, the next day the popular dailies ran according to form with such headlines as "Paltry traitor meets his just deserts." Nothing changes, nothing will ever change while Britain presumes to dictate to the Irish Nation. ; The paraleels between the belfast Ten and the Césement trial, or any other major Irish trial in britain, are uncomfortably vivid, and sacrificial victims will always be found, a truth Irish people appreciate only too well.

: To claim Casement hed an impartialand fair trial is ludicrous, when one recalls the propagandist use of the "Black Diaries" during and after his trial, and it is clear that the Belfast Ten can expect no different judicial treatment. Perhaps even a reference to the trial conducted by the King and Queen of Hearts in Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland" might not be out of context here. It will be recalled that when the King asked the jury for their verdict on who stole the tarts, the Queen interrupted: "No, no!", siad the Queen, "Sentence first - verdict afterwards," "Stuff and nonesense!", said Ajice loudly, "The idea of having the sentence first!"

=o "Hold your tongue!" said the Queen, turning purple.

"T won't!" said Alice. | "off with her head!" the Queen said, at the top of her voice. Nobody moved. "Who cares for you?" said Alice, "You're nothing but a pack of cards!" Without quite saying that "Alice in wonderland" is subversive, the attitudes of Alice were so right to the personification of justice that was the Queen.

Lewis Carrol did not write completely empty nonesense, The date of the forthcoming judicial farce is at present the 10th of September, a date fixed by that good freind of the Irish people, Lord Widgery, the British Lord Cheif Justice. He apparently does not intend to: waver from this date, despite the fact that the trial prosecution still has not forwarded vital documents outlining their evidence to the defense solicitors preparing the case for the Pelfast Ten, It would seem that all stops are being pulled out to secure conviction in Winchester.

i At the present moment of writing, the eight in Brixton have just undergone a week's withdrawl of what are called "prison privileges", ie. visits, newspapers, and :the like - those things that make incarceration vaguely tolerable.

This punishment was inflicted for their attempts to curb the physical and mental distress caused by vermin running loose in their Top Security Wing cells. Needless to say, the mice are still there, and the eight are not even allowed the use of disinfectant.

One of the eight, Gerard Kelly, underwent three days bread and water diet through his endevours to mark the second anniversary of the introduction of internment in the Six Counties, by whatever methods he could, In short, their wardens are still doing their level best to flatten their morale and resitance. - No efforts have been spared to this end, to break the courage and solidarity of the Belfast Ten, even before their "trial". That is one very big reason why, when they eventually appear in the Winchester Crown Court before twelve "men good and true" they deserve and need all support possible.

They have resisted institutionalised State thuggery and now they need us, We must not be found wanting.

a _ 5 : —- - . . th eee U 88, Roslyn Road, London N15 Py YK Ae GO ix ti

KKK K RHE KKK KKK KEK EKER KEK KKK KK KE KK EK KKK EKER

A committee has. been set up to defend these ten people. It is in urgent need of support. It calls on all those willing to defend democratic rights, .and who are opposed to the continued repression of Irish militants, to assist it in launching an international campaign to highlight the way in which the Belfast Ten have been treated since their arrest, and to demand their unconditional release. The committee has been in touch with the families and associates of the Ten, and with their agreement has assumed responsibility for the welfare of the prisoners - insofar as the prison authorities are willing to have any provision for their welfare made. the committee needs money - to bring the families of the Ten to London to visit them, to ensure that food, cigarettes, books etc. are made available, and for printing, the hire of halls etc. At present the committee has no funds at all.

The increasing repression of Irish militants in Britain now means that every major town here has its quota of Irish he ae political prisoners awaiting trial.

All donations and other communications should be sent to:- Maureen Maguire, 88, Roslyn: Rd., London N15 telephone 01-800-9392

=t6= 3. CONSPIRACY LAWS. A_ Charter for REPRESSION

BY BRIAN ROSE-SMITH (HALDANE SOCIETY)

KHKKKKKREE

Over the past few years there has been a notable increase in the use of the offense of conspiracy, particularly in cases of a political nature, Of these cases a large proportion have included defendants active in the Izish Republican movement. Thus, since 1969 there has been over thirty such cases involving more than sixty Irish defendants.

The two most recent examples are the "Belfast Ten" and the "Coventry Seven", In each case the defendants are charged with conspiracy to cause explosions.

Other trials involving the use of conspiracy charges include that of the "Stoke Newington Eight" where four of the defendants were sentenced to ten years for conspiring to cause explosions, and, of particular importance to the Trade Union movement, a case in Birmingham involving five building workers and three ATV camera men, all charged with conspiracy to trespass, This particular case arose when in Feb, 1973 a number of building workers occupied the S.0O.S.

Employment Bureau in protest against the use of "lump" labour, It is perhaps the latter case that underlines the the invidiousness of the offence of conspiracy and the scope that it affords the state for oppressive action. Thus while to trespass is a civil wrong and is therefore not triable in a criminal court, a recent decision of the House of Loras' in which judgement was delivered by the Lord Chancellor, held that a conspiracy to trespass can be an indictable offence where its execution has as its object "the invasion of the public domain" or "to exclude the victim altogether from possession or to deprive him of any effectual enjoyment of it during the execution of that ccmbination." So claimants who occupy the local Social Security Office runthe risk of being indicted for conspiracy to trespass as would workers who occupied a factory. The wider implications of this decision for the working class and for the squatters movement are obvious and will not be discussed here, But what exactly is the crime of conspiracy, and how did it develop? Conspiracy is a common law offence and as such has

el Fins no max imum sentence, Its origins are ra the doen ite rrp x when it feats crnemked | Conte taty Tort (a ci: rong) of conspiracy wa ute in the reign of Edward I (1272-1307) air waa ticle against agreements to conduct legal proceedings in an improper way. The criminal aspects of Conspiracy were developed by the Court of Star Chamber, where unlawful agreements became a substantive offence, From there it penatrated the common law courts, where it was received as a loosel . : eeitio... ee doctrine "capable of almost indefinate That indeed is still the osition today a i reason why the law of conspiracy See oe siols & iheent ie political and civil activists. ‘That propgsition is evinced by the Lord Chancellor's remark in camera that he didnot consider that the categories of conspiracy to effett a public mischief as closed, or even capalbe of being closed.

The definition of a criminal conspiracy is generall accepted as that given in a House of Lords geo aon 40 18685 being the agreement of two or more persons to do an unlawful act or to do a lawful act in an unlawful way.

' Thus the gist of.the. offence is not doing the act, or effecting the purpose for which the conspiracy is formed, nor attempting to do them, nor inciting others to do (though ‘ there is an offence of conspiracy to incite) but in forming of the ‘scheme or agreement between the parties; that is the overt act, it needs nothing further.

Thus as regards the offence of conspiracy to trespass discussed above, it is the agreement to trespass that renders it a criminal offence, not the actual trespass itself.

Accordingly, even if no trespass took place the parties to the agreement would have committed an offence.

Certain other consequences flow from this definition of conspiracy. Hence an act which if done by one person would not be criminal, may be if done by two or more persons.

That this is so has already been alluded to in the discussion of conspiracyto trespass and it will be convenient to continue with this éxampie: - This arises where the agreement is to commit an unlawful act, though nota criminal act. Clearty, therefore if one squatter, acting by himself, occupies a house and deprives the owner of that house of "effectuel enjoyment", even though that act is unlawful he cannot be charged with criminal offence. However, should the same squatter agree with others to occupy a house, then, once the parties agree, the offence of conspiracy is complete.

-18- -_. t to trespass. his example refers to an agreemen Tres eid ta a tart and is therefore an unlawful act. Rhee what f6 and what is not an unlawful act is itself som g that lacks clear definition. sia i i i serio t is axiomatic that legal rules imposing eintell conneeere should be stated - a. Var eee ae i f conspiracy to do an 1 ac ge contest ae in that in many cases it is against this principle in. t !

eae to set out the rules relating to objects i arraiaad agreements. The "Times" in an editorial en ae "Dangerous Laws of Conspiracy" on the 5th July 1973 ye ae this very point, ".....it is often difficult to know re hand even on the best advice, whether or not an ia ek fe) take a certain course of action might amount to conspiracy under the criminal law. The law does not in effect become known until the court has given its decision."

The editorial then went on to cite a well known case?

in which the House of Lords created the offence of conspiracy to corrupt public morals, an example of the Scopefof the extention of the criminal law that the offence of consprracy allows, Even ifit is possible to provide a precise statement of the offence, such astatement covers such a wide range of conduct that it is impossible to decide whether an offence has been committed or not.

Conspiracy to do an unlawful act, as Opposed toa criminal act, is usually oharged when the contentious conduct has been completed. The purpose is to obtain a conviction where the prosecution feels that another charge would not suceed , and where it palpably would not where the conduct is not also a criminal act. Such a case is the propecution of the five Birmingham workers ror conspiracy to “hat there is concern even in the echelons of the legal profession about this aspect of conspiracy is evidenced by a recent report by the Law Commission which ‘stated, veeeeeWe do not think that the proper role of conspiracy is to provide a means of convicting those whose conduct would not otherwise have been punishable," Such a statement is contrary to the attitude taken by the House of Lords in its recent decision on conspiracy and it will be interesting to observe the outcome of this conflict, Often, when the Substantive offence has been committed, conspiracy to commit the crime and the substantive

=19offence are both charged. In some cases this tactic is used by the prosecution to pressure the defendant into pleading guilty to the substantive offence in exchange for the prosecution not proceeding on the conspiracy charge. It is also used to try and ensure a conviction. Thus, "Substantive counts are charged in case the evidence of conspiracy breaks down: conspiracy is charged in case the evidence on the substantive counts against one or more defendants breaks down, "/ Not only does this practice impose upon the defendant an onerous evidential burden but it adds to the length and ‘complexity of trials, it tends to obscure questions of facts vital to the decisionsof the case and it allows evidence to be given which is relevant to the conspiracy charge but which may have a prejudicial effect on an accused in relation to the substantive counts.

This is particularly so when the conspiracy count has been so widely drawn and where, as is often the case, t the evidence offered against the defendants is vague and far ranging. Further, the very nature of conspiracy ee " allows evidence relating to the political views tae | ivities of the defendants to be introduced in an attemp fe) prove the alleged agreement by showing that there was a motive. i — To cite one case, Mr. Justice Kilner Brown “a in the trial of Smullen, Doherty, Meehan and Brankin, al charged with conspiracy to purchase arms, on " ....lt is flying in the face of common ae one is dealing with allegations of the purchase an a that there must be for the want of @ better term 1 = hee as it were, 2 natural part of such charge when ot. Ps te with conspiracy , what might be called motive. e oint of it? What is the purpose of it? Once re — Envolved, in etLeestion® 02 COUSPEe nignay reievent to the iti j ems L ¢ quantities of amie wvailable of membership of some oo uae, It may well be extremely germain to the issue the charge as iv is,” This was said in respo that membership ecards of Clann n not be admitted as evidence. | .

Not only were they admitted by the Judge s ruling, but so also were copies of the "United Irishman" and @ copy of "Memoirs of General Grivas".

j j i ad Duigon ing the trial of Jenkinson, Kissaine an who came ae ee relating to the bomb attack at Aldershot to the defence submission ast n-Eireann or NICRA should Sr.

~-20acks in February 1972, in connection with a charge of Papi boretiex with others unknown to effect a public mischief by means of possessing explosive substances for — an unlawful purpose, ie. by promoting by violence a political object, a United Irland", the prosecution produced copies of "United Irishman", "An Poblacht", "The IRA Speaks", "Divided Ulster","Labour in Irish History" by James Connolly, “Irish Songs of Resistance" and other similar literature taken from the houses of the accused men.

Frequently in cases involving conspiracy charges, the defendants are subjected to massive security precautions with armed guards, high security category classification in prison, blaring police convoys from prison to court and street cordons and searches in the area of the court. These measures, surrounding it in an atmosphere of near hysteria, are hardly likely to assist the defence in the conduct of % the case, The lack of clear definition, the wide range of potentially criminal conduct, the nebulous nature of the evidence often offered against the alleged conspirators and the evidential difficulties that face defendants as a result, together -with the onerous practice of preffering an indictment which alleges both the substantive crime and the conspiracy to commit it, all combine to make the offence of conspiracy a formidable weapon in the states arsenal of oppression. That the state does make use of the law of conspiracy to meet particular types of opposition is evident. In the present juncture this use has been mainly confined to opposition against British policy in Northern +reland and to certain Anarchist groups. But it is already being used increasingly against workers in their day to day struggle (the building workers in Birmingham and Shrewsbury) and should the crisis in british Capital deepen, its use would become more widespread than ever. In March of 1970, Lord Shaweross wrote to "The Times" on the subject of strikes occuring in thedocks and threatened over the British United Airways takeover. He stated, ".....Those Trade Union Officials who incite others to take industrial action for political purposes.....should remember that such action renders Officials and Unions.....liable to damages.....or penalties (for conspiracy is also a criminal offence).....

it is not only the rule of law but Parliamentary Govermment itself which is at risk."9 With such offences available as conspiracy to raise discontnet and disaffection among the subjects of the Queen and conspiracy to work to the prejudice of the state, there

=21are few who would be really safe,

KRKKKKKKHKRE

‘> Kamara and Others against the Director of Public ' Prosecutions, "The Times", July 4th 1973 see Ante Mulcahy against the Queen Provided that he did not enter in breach of any of statutes of forcible entry and detainer.

Shaw against the Director of Public Prosecutions.

"Inchoate Offences, Conspiracy attempt and incitement" 5th June 1973. op cit page 39 Quoted in "Irish Victims of British Justice" by Jaqueline Kaye, "Hibernia" July 13th 1973.

"The Times" 18th March 1970.

KEKKKEKKKEE

a OL CO CC i A A ES A ee hc KH KH KKK KH KKK HH EK K KKK KEKE KKK EK KK KKKE KKK KEKKEKEK KKK KEE ANTI-INTERNMENT LEAGUE cue | *****PREE ALL INTERNEES AND IRISH POLITICAL a

*****WITHDRAW BRITISH TROOPS FROM IRELAND NOW

***** SHLEODETERMINAPION FOR THE IRISH PEOPLE

*****SOLIDARITY WITH REPUBLICAN AND SOCIALIST FORCES

RESISTING BRITISH IMPERIALISM IN IRELAND

KEKKKKKKKE

The Central London Anti-Internment League links all who support the above demands in united action.

KKEKKHHEKKHHE

For Details contact: Bob Purdie, 81 Park Avenue !

JOIN THE A.TIL. AND MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD.

North, London N&, |