THE former Taoiseach, Mr Albert Reynolds, told the High Court in London yesterday that he did not read newspapers during the crisis which brought down, his government, nor had he read these newspapers since.
He was explaining to Mr James Price, counsel for the Sunday Times newspaper, why he had not complained about a number of articles in Irish newspapers who accused him of lying to and misleading the Dail. They were brought to his attention at the beginning of this trial, and he has now asked his lawyers to examine them to see whether he should complain about them, he said.
His counsel showed correspondence to this effect to the judge and jury.
Mr Reynolds is suing the Sunday Times over an article which appeared on November 20th, 1994, which described him as a "gombeen man" and said, "How a fib too far proved fatal for Ireland's peacemaker and Mr Fixit."
The judge, Mr Justice French, ruled that Mr Reynolds could be cross examined on these other articles, not to establish the truth of the Sunday Times allegations, but so that Mr Reynolds could be asked why he did not object to them.
Mr Price first quoted at length from an article by Gene Kerrigan in the Sunday Independent, under the heading, "No dignity in the Dail of deception".
"In his first paragraph he says that your claim to be a man of integrity is a piece of nonsense."
"I am a man of integrity," replied Mr Reynolds.
Mr Justice French intervened to say: "What is said here is that you're not a man of integrity. You disagree with that. That's all he's seeking to establish."
Mr Price continued quoting: "His speech was a carefully concocted piece of deception concocted with the help of his Fianna Fail colleagues. Did any of your colleagues bring this to your attention?"
Mr Reynolds: "No."
Mr Price: "Did any of your children?"
Mr Reynolds: "If any of my children had read an article like that they would have brought it to my attention, as my daughter in Edinburgh did."
Mr Price continued to quote from the article, which alleged that Mr Noel Dempsey, Mrs Maire Geogeghan Quinn, Mr Brian Cowen, Mr Bertie Ahern and other leading members of the Fianna Fail parliamentary party had also known about the Duggan letter on Tuesday.
"Mr Dempsey is your close colleague and friend?"
Mr Reynolds: "Yes."
"And he didn't mention this to you?"
"No."
"One million people in Ireland have seen this article and you have made no complaint about it," said Mr Price. "You would not want to suggest to the jury that the Sunday Independent was the only paper in Ireland to accuse you of lying to the Dail and misleading the Dail."
"Reading newspapers was not my priority in those traumatic days," Mr Reynolds said. "The most I would have done was run my eyes over the headlines.
"When you resign and get out of office you have to decide how to put that trauma behind you. Otherwise you'd become an embittered person. I've gone through trauma before."
"Are you telling the jury that you have not, until the last few days, seen any Irish newspaper which accused you of lying to the Dail?" asked Mr Price.
"I can't recall reading them," Mr Reynolds replied.
Pressed by Mr Price on whether he had seen any newspaper criticising him at that time, Mr Reynolds restated that he saw no point in it, and he wanted to put the whole episode behind him.
He was asked about an article in the Irish Independent at the time by Bruce Arnold, which stated: "Spring wins the long and tortuous battle for integrity." Had Mr Reynolds complained about it? "No," he said. "I looked at the overall tone of it and it didn't jump out at me."
"This is a straightforward frontal attack, isn't it?" asked Mr Price. "And you told the jury that if anyone attacked your integrity, you'd go after them."
Mr Reynolds said he had not read it, but would read it carefully now.
The article said that Mrs Geoghegan Quinn had been "damaged irreversibly". Did she tell him they had both been "grotesquely libelled", Mr Price asked. "No," replied Mr Reynolds.
Mr Price then drew attention to an article in the Sunday Tribune - by Mr Adrian Hardiman. Mr Reynolds agreed that he took the Sunday Tribune, but denied reading this article.
The article had described Mr Reynolds's version of the events surrounding the Whelehan controversy as "arrant nonsense". Had he made a complaint? "No".
"Did you think Mr Hardiman had malice when he wrote this article?" asked Mr Price. "I can't comment," Mr Reynolds replied.
"Are you prepared to withdraw the allegation of malice against Mr Alan Ruddock?"
"No, I could not."
Mr Price asked him if it was true that The Irish Times was the "top paper" and the "most venerable" newspaper in Ireland. Mr Reynolds replied that it would have "much less" circulation than the Irish Independent.
Asked what his view was of The Irish Times, Mr Reynolds said: "My view would be taken as biased because I had occasion to take certain action against The Irish Times." Pressed by the judge for his view he said: "Certain journalists did not like me the first day I became Taoiseach."
Mr Price read from an article in The Irish Times on November 18th 1994 which described Mr Reynolds as "a political bully behind a smiling face . .. with a cynical indifference to those principles of public office which don't suit his purpose."
He asked him if he had sued over this article, and Mr Reynolds said "No. Principles are not spelt out. There's a question would you succeed in a libel."
He agreed he did not sue either over another article in The Irish Times which talked of a "saga of deceit" and "wanton dereliction".
"Perhaps we can summarise," Mr Price said. "Generally in the Irish press you were seriously libelled all that week. For an Irishman whose business is in Ireland, whose family is in Ireland, to choose to sue in England when all that is in the Irish papers is bizarre, isn't it?
"The fact is that your reputation has been shattered into pieces in Ireland and you appear not to have noticed. Were you at all concerned that if you sued in Ireland, your accusers, Mr Spring and Mr Fitzsimons, would have given evidence?"
How did I know they would not give evidence here?" Mr Reynolds asked.
Lord Gareth Williams, counsel for Mr Reynolds, asked him if he knew any reason why Mr Spring could not come to give evidence in London. Mr Reynolds said he did not.
Lord Williams pointed out that evidence to the Dail select committee on the fall of the government was not given on oath, and there was no opportunity for members to have questions put by their legal representatives.
"Would you have been willing for evidence to be recorded before a judge in Ireland, and there could have been cross examination on that evidence which could have been recorded?" he asked. Mr Reynolds said he would.
"If the Sunday Times had wished for its witnesses to give evidence on a video link would you have been happy with that?" "Quite happy," Mr Reynolds said.