Alleged escaper remains silent on questions about jail-break

THE alleged Brixton prison escaper, Nessan Quinlivan, appeared in the witness box in his High Court bail application yesterday but refused to answer State counsel's questions about the 1991 jail-break.

Quinlivan is one of a number of men challenging their continued detention after they were released and rearrested because of the confusion arising from Judge Dominic Lynch's delisting.

He was called to reply to evidence given by Limerick detectives on Monday that a witness in a case involving him had been intimidated by persons acting on Quinlivan's behalf.

Questioned by his counsel, Ms Mary Ellen Ring, Quinlivan said he did not know a Mr Michael Lyons of Garryowen, Limerick with whose false imprisonment on August 25th last he is charged. He said he had not made threatening phone calls to Mr Lyons or his relatives. He had not authorised anyone else to do so.

He confirmed that between November 1995 and his arrest in October, he had been signing on daily in Limerick's Henry Street Garda station in accordance with the conditions of his bail. If granted bail, he agreed he would not leave the jurisdiction and would stay away from witnesses who might be giving evidence against him.

Questioned by counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions Mr Diarmaid McGuinness SC Quinlivan agreed that he was "a familiar sight" around Limerick. He answered "Yes, I suppose so", when asked if he was a person of some notoriety in the city.

But when Mr McGuinness asked him if he had escaped from Brixton Prison in 1991, Ms Ring objected that that was a matter to be decided in another jurisdiction. After some legal debate, Judge Peter Kelly advised Quinlivan that he was not obliged to answer questions that might incriminate him.

When the question was put again, he refused to answer. He accepted that in previous court appearances he had not challenged or contradicted evidence that he had escaped from Brixton, but when counsel for the DPP asked him if he would agree that she "left" Brixton Prison in 1991, he again refused to answer.

He also refused to reply to questions about where he was in July and August 1991, or when he had returned to Ireland, or where he was immediately prior to his arrest in Ireland in April 1993.

After further legal debate, Judge Kelly ruled that the line of questioning was relevant to the bail application and that answers would not tend to incriminate the applicant. He told Quinlivan that if he did not reply to the questions, the court would be entitled to draw certain inferences. When the question of where he was immediately before his 1993 arrest was repeated, however, he again refused to answer.

Asking the judge to rule in favour of the bail application, Ms Ring said that the new sureties being offered would leave four different individuals guaranteeing Quinlivan's bail to the amount of £80,000. The applicant had been on bail for 10 months up to October this year and had honoured the terms.

Mr McGuinness said that Quinlivan had been guilty of a "gross abuse of this court" in refusing to answer questions on issues he knew to be involved in his application.

The judge said he would rule on the case and on three other bail applications next Friday.