“Why the gardai would converse by email with Chris Bray about a live investigation of which he is not part and really has no business involving himself in, is a mystery to me.”

And? The press office of a government agency responded to a simple question — it’s the mystery of the century, for sure.

It is equally pointless for them to criticise cops for going after the tapes and doing what cops do.

Why the gardai would converse by email with Chris Bray about a live investigation of which he is not part and really has no business involving himself in, is a mystery to me.

I agree with Ted that the blame does not all belong to BC, but must be shared equally among those that drew up contracts they could not legally stand over. Yes BC behaviour was less than perfect, but Anthony McIntyre agreed with William Crawley on his Sunday morning show that on hindsight they should have sought legal advice, and that that was a mistake. Its why they are where they are now, in a mess mainly of their own making.

Ed is neither an advocate of unionism or nationalism. While in the North he was at the cutting edge of investigative journalism.

Does Danny want the tapes handed over? I honestly do not know. He backs the British PSNI although we can’t infer from this that he would support everything they do. All we can do is look at what is in front of us in the public arena. The thrust of his discourse dovetails with the PSNI to a point where the difference between he and they is paper thin. His stance towards the researchers is malign while it is benign toward the PSNI raiding party. That can be easily gleaned from an observation of his written and spoken discourse on the matter. If he genuinely is opposed to the tapes being ‘repatriated’ he makes a very weak case. His main emphasis is clearly on trying to discredit the project which ultimately butresses the British case to seize the archive.

Again thanks for hosting such a discussion on this excellent legal blog. I know it is not your usual fare.

Anthony, your point about Ed is well-taken, though I assume he’s not a unionist!

Are you saying that you think Morrison wants the tapes to come out? I love a good conspiracy theory, but I just don’t see how that can be plausible.

you are somewhat mistaken in assuming it is an intra-republican debate. Ed Moloney is a journalist not someone with a republican axe to grind one way or the other. I bring the republican dimension to my writings. Ed is a straightforward journalist. He called Sinn Fein out so often and the party consequently loathes him. The party is tightly controlled, deeply censorious and as such finds it difficult to live with alternative ideas, seeking always to suppress them.

You would imagine both parties to the discussion would share an interest in not having the tapes returned. But things are never what they seem now are they?

In more direct response to your comment, I don’t suppose that’s surprising, because the Morrison/M&M dispute is an intra-republican dispute, not a dispute between the Irish and the British or between republicans and unionists.

Chris, what’s your take on why Morrison and M&M have come to metaphorical blows? It’s a bit of a puzzle to me. First, both of them share an interest in the tapes not being produced. Second, I don’t think that Morrison and other Sinn Féin supporters are opposed in principle to the idea of oral histories of the Troubles. From the outside, it looks like their disagreements about whether the Good Friday Accords were a good idea are simply bleeding over into an area where they really shouldn’t be disagreeing. What do you think?

Well that’s interesting!