‘Eminently possible’ Burke annoyed inmates, court hears

The Editor of the Sunday Independent has told the High Court he believes it was “eminently and manifestly possible” that Enoch Burke was annoying other inmates in Mountjoy Prison in Dublin.

Alan English said he did not believe there was anything defamatory in an article about Mr Burke published in October 2022.

Mr English was giving evidence on the third day of a defamation action by Enoch Burke in which he seeks punitive and aggravated damages for defamation over an article published during his first period of detention for contempt of court.

The article said Mr Burke had to be moved to another prison cell because he was annoying other inmates with his religious beliefs.

Mr English told the court the information had come from a long-standing source of reporter Ali Bracken who he said was a journalist of the utmost integrity in whom he had a huge amount of trust .

During cross-examination by Enoch Burke, who is representing himself, Alan English accepted there were some inaccuracies in the article. He accepted the prison service had issued a statement to say Mr Burke had been moved for “operational reasons”.

He said this had been clarified in a correction and apology published by the paper. Enoch Burke asked Mr English “do you accept I wasn’t annoying other prisoners?”

Mr English replied: “I accept that a statement was provided by the prison service to that effect, whether or not you were, is a matter of some conjecture. Are you capable of annoying other prisoners? In my opinion, manifestly yes.”

He also said: “Do I believe there is a possibility that you were annoying other prisoners? I think it is eminently possible.”

He rejected a suggestion that a decision to publish the article demonstrated complete and utter recklessness because there was no attempt to contact Mr Burke or his family prior to publication. He replied “we were not in a position to contact you because you were in prison”.

An earlier article written by the same journalist with the heading “they’re not liked around here” was also put to Mr English who said it was a “taking the temperature of the local community about the Burke family”. He denied it was gutter journalism and an abuse of a media platform.

In his direct evidence Mr English said every news article was reviewed by their legal advisers and no red flags were raised about the article in question. He said after a complaint was made by the Burkes about the article an investigation uncovered what he would regard as minor mistakes, such as stating that Mr Burke had been moved from the general prison population to a progression unit.

This information had been received by the reporter in good faith, he said. He added that he had been provided with a statement from the prison service that Enoch Burke had been moved for operational reasons but “took the view that the proposition that he had been annoying people was entirely believable and I took some time to ascertain whether this was the case or not”.

He said the complaint from the Burkes escalated quickly into a full blown legal process.

As a result it took some time to publish a correction and apology which they pressed ahead with because the Burkes would not agree to the wording of the correction. Mr English said the paper abided by strict ethical standards to ensure journalists went about their jobs in a “responsible, caring and proper way”.

Along with an internal code of practice it was subject to oversight by the Press Council. No complaint had been made the Press Council about the article in question, he said.

Earlier, he said the paper had carried more articles that were favourable to Enoch Burke than any other publication.

A columnist Eilis O’Hanlon had written at least four pieces including one questioning why Enoch Burke was in prison for standing outside a school and another suggesting there had to be a way of accommodating his views.

However, he said he believed that most of the people in the country did not agree with how Enoch Burke had engaged with the justice system.

He said his impression of his engagement with the justice system had been reinforced by what he had seen in court over the past couple of days, adding: “he wants everything on his own terms”.

Martina Burke accuses newspaper of ‘making up lies’

Earlier, Enoch Burke’s mother Martina told the High Court she is not directing him to remain in Mountjoy Prison.

During cross-examination Martina Burke was repeatedly asked if her son had breached a court order to which she replied several times that the courts had a duty to uphold the constitutional right to religious belief.

Senior Counsel Ronan Lupton asked if she had ever said to her son that he should purge his contempt.

She replied that she did not believe he was in contempt.

Mr Lupton asked “are you directing him to remain in Mountjoy?” She replied: “I’m not directing anyone.”

Asked if she was deeply distressed and humiliated when he went to prison as she said she had been by the article she replied “no”.

She said she was not humiliated by someone standing up for his religious belief.

Mrs Burke also accused the newspaper of “making up lies about a young man starting off in life” and said her son “could be in the grave” if he did not have the support behind him.

She said with high rates of suicide and stress and tension “we had to go to court to get them to take down lies”.

In her direct evidence she said she was horrified to read the article as she had been speaking to her son regularly and there was never any mention of any differences with other inmates.

She immediately called the Irish Prison Service press office and it was later confirmed to her that the information in the article was incorrect.

She said she had to threaten court action against the Sunday Independent before the article was taken down a number of days later.

Asked by Enoch Burke what her reaction to the article was she said she was absolutely distressed and horrified and was shocked and embarrassed.

She said she knew it was not true and it was lies.

Mrs Burke said the article portrayed her son as someone who annoys people so much to the point they would beat him severely.

She said her “world stopped” that morning as she was supposed to be driving her other son to Galway and instead had to spend the morning making phone calls “begging the Irish Independent to take it down”.

The case continues tomorrow.