A GARDA detective denied a suggestion in the High Court yesterday that he had been "indiscreet" when he told a District Justice that he believed irregular representations had been made in a case he was investigating.
Garda Fergal Foley, of Rye River Close, Leixlip, Co Kildare, claims that, following his statement to the District Judge, he was unlawfully transferred from detective duties to uniform duties. He is suing the Garda authorities for breach of contract, defamation and breach of his constitutional rights. He claims that the transfer amounted to a demotion.
Following the decision to transfer him to uniform duties, Garda Foley claims he was ill for a period and later served in Ronanstown in Co Dublin. He was reappointed a detective garda in Ronanstown in 1995.
The Garda authorities, in their defence, claim that while Garda Foley was undergoing his probationary period as a detective garda his superiors considered he did not possess the qualifications required to be a good detective and recommended his transfer out of the Central Detective Unit.
The Garda authorities also deny that no adequate reason was given and deny there was a conspiracy against Garda Foley.
Garda Foley yesterday agreed it was a matter for the Garda Commissioner to appoint and reallocate personnel if it was in the best interests of the force.
Mr John Finlay SC, for the Garda Commissioner, said that during a District Court hearing in May, 1992, in response to a question from District Judge Gillian Hussey on why the Director of Public Prosecutions was seeking a further adjournment of a case, Garda Foley expressed the view that an irregular representation had been made to the DPP.
Garda Foley said he was asked several times why there was a delay. He believed he had answered honestly and truthfully.
Mr Finlay said Garda Foley had been implying that, as a result of improper and irregular representations, there was a delay on the part of the DPP in pursuing the case.
Garda Foley said he had simply stated that irregular representations had been made which resulted in further queries being raised by the DPP's office. He made no allegations against the DPP.
Judge Hussey, in evidence, said that a barrister for the State had asked for a three week adjournment. She asked why and got no satisfaction from the barrister. She then asked the defence lawyer. Eventually, she asked Garda Foley, who indicated he understood representations were being made. This had to be prised out of him.
The case continues today.