The High Court investigation under Article 40 of the Constitution into the legality of Simeon Burke’s arrest and detention concluded yesterday.
Simeon Burke had made, according to Mr Justice Cregan, “wild and unfounded allegations” against the arresting Gardai.
Yet when the Gardai gave evidence on oath in the hearing Simeon Burke declined to cross examine them or test the evidence. He was encouraged to do so by Mr Justice Cregan, according to the reporting, on more than one occasion.
But he refused to engage any further in the hearing reciting a mantra that the inquiry was not being conducted in accordance with law and the Constitution.
His District Court trial is due to take place next Monday where he faces a public order offence allegation.
I shudder to think what will happen if he lets five Gardai give evidence about his arrest and ejection from the Court of Appeal unchallenged and uncontested, with no cross examination.
What can the District Court judge do then when it comes to determining whose version of events is more likely?
Take a guess.
Incidentally, Enoch Burke also declined to test the evidence in his case against Wilson’s Hospital school. He declined to cross examine the school’s witnesses-for example the former Principal Niamh McShane and others.
And he declined to take his own witnesses through their evidence.
Legal proceedings and litigation are adversarial processes. Evidence is supposed to be tested and challenged.
Those who accuse must prove.
Making assertions and statements only goes so far.