The Gazette 1974

"Do you think that this sex stuff will help sell your paper in Christian I r e l a n d / It will finish it off. Please stop it before it is too late. Whatever member of your staff is the master sex minder should get the door," continued Mr. O'Dwyer's letter. On June 3, The Sunday World in its letters column published two letters, one in the name of Rev. Francis O'Doherty, Clonskea, Dublin, said : "Where the comments of Mr. L. O'Dwyer of Bantry are concerned, he obviously must have enlisted the aid of a magnifying glass in order to ascertain what could or could not be seen in the photograph . . ." the letter added. The second letter in the name of Richard Power, M.Sc., of Trinity College, Dublin, said that Mr. O'Dwyer's letter had promoted a discussion involving five post-graduates of psychology in the college library and the conclusion unanimously was that Mr. O'Dwyer "suffers from a form of sexual aberration which, unfor- tunately, is too often seen in the country areas of Ireland where sex education in schools is so sadly lacking." Fictitious letter writers Mr. O'Dwyer stated that to the best of his knowledge and belief there were no such persons as Rev. Francis O'Doherty of Clonskea, or Richard Power, an M.Sc. of Trinity College. He claimed that he had been greatly prejudiced and injured in his credit and reputation and had been brought into public scandal, contempt and ridicule by the letters. Sunday Newspapers Ltd., in defence, claimed that by writing to The Sunday World the plaintiff impliedly invited other persons to reply to his letter and invited the defendants to publish such letters. The defendants had no reason to believe that the letters were not authentic and had no duty to the plaintiff to investigate the authenticity of letters in reply to his. They held that the words in the letters were true in substance and in fact and were fair comment made in good faith without malice. Bogus Letters Mr. O'Dwyer said that after the publication of the two letters he felt very embarrassed and deeply insulted and his wife and family had similar feelings. He was suspicious that they were genuine letters and investi- gated both of them and found they were, in fact, bogus. Rev. James Murray, C.C., Clonskea, said there was no such person or clergyman of any other denomination in the parish as "Rev. Francis O'Doherty". Dermot Sherlock, assistant secretary of records at Trinity College, said there was no person of the name of Richard Power either as a student in the college or as a graduate holding a degree. Kevin Marron, deputy editor of The Sunday World and responsible for the letters column in June last, said he passed Mr. O'Dwyer's letter for publication. It would not be practicable for a newspaper to check the identity of all persons who >vrote letters to the editor. Mr. Noel Peart, S.C., for the defendants, submitted that although the letters complained of might be defam- atory of Mr. O'Dwyer, they were not actionable because he had brought them on himself.

"Scurrilous references are criminal" Judge Neylon said it had to be accepted that a per- son writing to a newspaper would probably receive a lot of replies and the paper was entitled to publish the replies even though they might be critical in form but still within the law. "But what is not acceptable is that a person should go outside the bounds of a proper reply and make accusations of a very anti-social, crim- inal and degrading nature. Newspapers are not entitled to indulge in that kind of a reply. " In this case I think the replies were made by anonyihous people whose identity was not checked by the paper. Those identities were followed up by the plaintiff and found to be bogus people masquerading i n the paper under respectable titles. "The plaintiff is, in my opinion, entitled to recover damages and recover such damages as to show that those scurrilous references which amount to criminality cannot, and will not be tolerated by any decent society, he concluded. [O'Dwyer v. Sunday Newspapers Ltd.; Judge Ney- lon; unreported; 29 February 1974.] Court frees Belfast woman after five-month extradition case. A young Belfast woman was freed by District Justice Carr in Bray (Co. Wicklow) Court yesterday, when h e refused an application for an extradition order against her. She is Marguerite O ' Ha r e, of Andersonstown, Belfast. Mrs. O ' Ha re first came before the Court in Bray last September and two days were fixed in the following month to hear legal arguments on the question of the validity of the Royal Ulster Constabulary warrant for her arrest. On the face of the warrant she was charged with shooting with intent to murder Warrant Officer Fraser Patton at Andersonstown, Belfast, on 25 October 1971. At the close of the arguments the hearing was adjourned to give the District Justice an opportunity to consider his decision. In the meantime, he took ill so the matter was adjourned and it was further adjourned on various dates until yesterday, again before District Justice Carr. Seven reasons for refusing extradition Reading his judgment, he set out seven reasons f° r refusing the application. He held that the first require- ment of a valid arrest warrant was that it should sho^ jurisdiction on its face. The warrant in the present case was issued at Belfast on 11 May 1973 and in his opinion it was not a valid warrant for a variety of reasons, the more obvious being that it failed to charge the respon- dent with any offence or crime; it only recited that a complaint had been made which alleged a crime by the respondent. It failed to disclose to whom such a cord- plaint was made. It failed to disclose that authority) he was of the opinion that the respondent was arrested) but the recital of a remand on recognisance on 3 Dec- 1971 implied that the respondent had been taken into custody. The right to issue an arrest warrant for a prisoner breaking bail did not survive after the date to which the person was remanded or the case adjourned. The District Justice pointed out that there wa 5 nothing to show that any jurisdiction existed on 11 May 100