Latest:

11:42 Seven sinks Westwood hopes
11:42 Teenage boy dies after bridge jump
11:40 Rory McIlroy misses cut again
11:02 Two held over Limerick drugs haul
10:02 Beale injury adds to Rebels woe
09:52 Ex-intelligence chief 'holds key'
09:52 Sagna confident Van Persie will stay
09:20 'Portas pilots' town centres named

Journalist Suzanne Breen wins Real IRA secrecy court battle

Thursday, 18 June 2009

A journalist won the right today to withhold information about the Real IRA from police after a judge ruled that her life would be in danger if she was forced to hand it over.

Suzanne Breen, northern editor of the Dublin-published Sunday Tribune, had been subject to a legal bid by Police Service of Northern Ireland chief constable Sir Hugh Orde, who wanted information on the murders of two British soldiers in March.

Northern Ireland-based Miss Breen received the Real IRA's claim of responsibility for shooting dead Sappers Patrick Azimkar, 21, from London, and Mark Quinsey, 23, from Birmingham, at the gates of Massereene Army Base in Antrim.

Belfast Recorder Tom Burgess acknowledged today that there was a great public interest in catching the killers but said the journalist's right to life outweighs that.

Print
Text Size
- Normal
- Large
- Extra Large

so it is ok for journalists to withhold information from the police but if joe public does it he/she is liable to arrest and prosecution. The journalist had the option of giving the information to the investigating police in confidence but she chose to advance her career by going public. This is a sad reflection on her and the Sunday Tribune who claim to want justice for the families of the injured and bereaved. I hope they can live with the consequences of their actions.

Posted by coca cola | 18.06.09, 20:00 GMT

Yet again Human Rights Legislation is used to protect the guilty.

Posted by disilussioned | 18.06.09, 19:43 GMT

Sensible outcome. Why would a journalist put their life and professional integrity on the line?

The police shouldn't be relying on journalists to do their job for them.

Posted by AM | 18.06.09, 17:58 GMT

The judge got it so wrong the police could appeal, but Ms Breen's objection was also wrong. No one, journalist, tinker, soldier sailor can stand over murder to protect themselves from the killers, and although the police demand lookd suspiciously like fishing, asking the recepient of a mere telephone call which could have been made to a switchboard, is police practice everywhere.

Posted by Paddy McGarvey | 18.06.09, 17:25 GMT

Well done, this is realy good news.

Posted by happy days | 18.06.09, 17:24 GMT

This is a great result, whistle-blowers can now breath easy, all you have to do is find a journalist that you can trust.

Posted by John | 18.06.09, 17:05 GMT

I think there are a few harsh words here, it's very easy to comment when all the details are not known. From the bits I have read previoulsy, Ms Breen passed on the information she was given but would not reveal the name of her source. Maybe her source is an undercover agent? It's not like she has the address book of the Real IRA in her possession!! Let's be honest, there are people out there know more! Finally it's very easy to be so outraged when it's not your life that is being threatened!!

Posted by The Baron | 18.06.09, 16:59 GMT

You're right, how dare she be concerned for her own life! You eejits!

Posted by Me | 18.06.09, 16:47 GMT

Absolutely disgusted with this decision.
Jouranalists at the top of their profession put theirs lives on the line daily so that we the people can be kept fully aware of things.
What this boils down to is this editors belief that if they give over the information then they may never be trusted again by the scum that they are talking too.
So essentially she is more concerned about her job than our lives.
Blood of innocent people is on your hands

Posted by Disgusted | 18.06.09, 16:12 GMT

I think this is a disgraceful outcome. Journalistic Integrity is put before catching murderers. Makes it look like this journalist isnt remotely interested in justice for those killed, just in her own career. Surely if she wanted these people caught then this whole episode wouldnt be played out in the media when the police first asked for her notes. Would it not have been the decent thing to hand over the notes and insist on confidentiality to help bring these people to justice instead.

Posted by Woody | 18.06.09, 15:57 GMT

What an appalling out-come. she is in effect putting her own life in front of the people who reside in this country. why does she consider her own life more important/of value than that of the soldiers who served proudly? concealing the very people who killed them is just...appalling. journalist freedom and being a ungreatful citizen are very different. Im sure theres some mouth pieces in the south now who would gladly fund her if she wanted to give up the right to work/live in the UK.

Posted by p knowles | 18.06.09, 14:06 GMT