Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
— March - April 2012
I
t was one of the most extraordinary news sto-
ries of . On March st, Gardaí in north
Mayo arrested two anti-Shell campaigners
and seized a video camera. The Garda ser-
geant and colleagues then inadvertently recorded
themselves joking about threatening to rape and
deport one of the two women in their custody
before handing the camera back. The recording
was posted online, where it was listened to by more
than , people within days. It provided a
disturbing glimpse into the minds of some of the
very people to whom women are expected to report
rape. However, the saga took a more worrying twist
four months later.
In late July, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman
Commission (GSOC), which was conducting a ‘pub-
lic interest’ inquiry into the incident, announced
it had sent an “Interim Progress Report” to the
Minister for Justice, Alan Shatter. Shatter pub-
lished the report and, within hours, widespread
media coverage had implanted several key pieces
of false information in the public mind.
This three-page report should be compulsory
reading for students of PR and political spin. By
cleverly juxtaposing several half-truths and omit-
ting most of the crucial information, it created an
impression that all was not as it seemed with the
‘rape tape’. It serves Garda interests by undermin-
ing the women and creating an impression that
these Gardaí might have been victims of Shell to
Sea shenanigans.
Back in April, the ‘rape tape’ had provoked
public outrage. The official Garda response was
contrite: the Garda Commissioner apologised
and reassured “victims of sexual crime” that they
should continue to report those crimes to Gardaí.
Behind the scenes, it was business as usual for
Garda ‘sources’. Personal details of the two arrested
women were leaked to the press (the women had
initially hoped to remain out of the public eye). A
reporter turned up at the family home of one of
them, Jerrieann Sullivan. She said her parents were
“extremely upset” by this. Meanwhile, Caoimhe
Kerins of Dublin Shell to Sea says she received tip-
offs from two crime correspondents that Gardaí
were spreading a rumour that the women had
shouted “rape” during the arrest. Kerins assured
them it wasn’t true and the journalists didn’t print
it. The rationale of Gardaí seemed to be that this
rumour would mitigate the Garda behaviour in the
public mind: a disturbing echo of the old notion
that a woman is to blame for rape.
This smear finally found its way into print
weeks later, when Jim Cusack published the
rumour as fact in the Sunday Independent on
June th. Sullivan complained to the Press
Ombudsman and in October he ruled that Cusack’s
article was “significantly misleading”.
Some Gardaí and their allies had been seeking
revenge. But surely GSOC would act more fairly
and impartially? The signs were not promising. On
April th, the News of the World quoted a “source”
at GSOC, claiming Sullivan was refusing to hand
over the camera. She says she was “shocked at how
a supposedly independent public body could feed
journalists with information that undermined a
witness in its own investigation”.
In fact, there was a short delay in handing over
the camera, because of a dilemma facing Jerrieann
Sullivan and lecturers at NUI Maynooth, where she
was doing an MA degree. The camera belonged to
the university and contained a research interview
she had recorded three weeks before the “rape”
recording. The interview was subject to confiden-
tiality agreements with the participants: academic
guidelines meant the confidentiality of the inter-
view had to be protected.
When GSOC demanded the camera, the uni-
versity academics explained their predicament
to GSOC and repeatedly offered to have the older
file deleted in the presence of GSOC. However,
they say GSOC ignored all offers and issued
threats of criminal prosecution against Sullivan
and her lecturers. A spokesman for GSOC told
Village he could not comment because, “This is
Masterclass in spin by
Garda Ombudsman
news
william hederman
The independent Garda
watchdog produced a
report about the Corrib
Garda ‘rape tape’ that
misinformed the public
and undermined the
women who brought
the recording to public
attention
an ongoing investigation of a criminal nature and
we are bound to protect the confidentiality of that
investigation.”
Jerrieann Sullivan was forced to hire a solicitor.
She says that he was, in turn, threatened by GSOC
“with a fine or imprisonment for not handing over
the camera”. A statement from seven academics
– Sullivan’s course directors at NUI Maynooth –
describes GSOC’s attitude to Sullivan and the other
woman (who has managed to remain anonymous)
as “consistently hostile, recalling past treatment
of the victims of sexual violence”.
Nine days after the story broke in April, the
older file , containing the recording of the research
interview, was deleted from the camera in the aca-
demics’ presence, and the camera given to GSOC.
The possible motives behind GSOC’s approach
became clearer when the Interim Report appeared.
The deletion of the older file was cleverly exploited
to give the false impression that the recording of
the rape comments had been “tampered with”.
The Interim Report makes no mention of
Sullivan’s and the academics’ explanations, nor
of their offers to reach a compromise. It sim-
ply reports that files had been deleted from the
camera, implying that this was mysterious: “The
significance of these deleted files ... was not
known”. The report is misleading by implying that
GSOC first became aware of the file deletion when
examining the camera, whereas in fact Sullivan
and the academics insist the file deletion had been
explained to them in a series of oral and written
communications, involving university authorities
and solicitors. When this was put to GSOC, the
spokesman pointed out that the interim report
“doesn’t say that the recording from March st
was interfered with.”
T
he report also appears to weigh in behind
the insidious Garda rumour that the
women said rape first. Jerrieann says she
was questioned by GSOC for almost five
hours, but her testimony is not referred to in the
report. The only person quoted in the report is an
unnamed detective, who makes a vague report of
having heard someone shout “rape”, though they
were “unsure of the exact words used”... as they say
their back was turned. Jerrieann says she told GSOC
categorically that neither of them used the word
“rape” during the arrest. There is no reference to
her version of events in the Interim Report.
GSOC’s spin was perfectly pitched: extensive
news coverage of the Interim Report led with the
(totally false) suggestion that the recording had
been “tampered with” – although GSOC had been
careful to stop short of directly stating this as fact.
The smear rumour about the women saying rape
first also featured prominently.
RTÉ reports on July th by Paul Reynolds were
so misleading, the BAI ruled in December they were
“inaccurate”, “unfair” and “harmful” to Jerrieann.
The station was forced to air a correction. Despite
the ruling, the misleading reports are still avail-
able (as Village goes to press) on the RTÉ website
under the headline, “Corrib rape remark record-
ing ‘was tampered with’.”
As Village goes to press, eight months after
the Interim Report, GSOC has not issued a final
report on this investigation.
It appears that people who embarrass An
Garda Síochána are, at least on this occasion, expe-
riencing repercussions: not only via the traditional
route – anonymous Gardaí briefing crime corre-
spondents – but also from the very body charged
with independent oversight of Gardaí.
William Hederman is a photojournalist and a
campaigner. He blogs at Irishoilandgas.com
The Interim Report has been published on the
Village website: villagemagazine.ie
Above: Jerrieann
Sullivan; right: one
of the the RTÉ news
reports from July 28th,
2011 - in December
the BAI found them
to be ‘inaccurate’,
‘unfair’ and ‘harmful to
Jerrieann Sullivan. At
time of going to press,
they were still on the
RTÉ website; below:
Gardaí policing a Shell
to Sea protest in Mayo
phOtO: williaM hederMan
