19 June 2006
Dear Andrew and Kevin (Rainbow) and PA,
I became increasingly disturbed after our meeting in Lisburn with Chief Inspector
Mark Gilmore (and other PSNI officers) with what we were being told and requested
to do.
First, I did not like the way we were asked, and implicitly obliged, to maintain
confidence over the revelation about one of the five people arrested at the Giants Ring
having committed suicide. I feel it was a form of blackmail when Gilmore mentioned
the family’s wishes etc. I do not feel bound by his request for confidentiality.
This was a member of our community whose well-being and welfare we exist
organisationally to protect. We do not have to collude with the PSNI or other public
authorities, like the Public Prosecutor’s Office, who wish to play down or hide
suicides. We need only think of the consequences of the suicide of Dr David Kelly,
and more recently of the three detainees in Guantanamo to recognise how this could
and should concern government, especially one majoring on suicide prevention as
ours is. And we have constantly warned of the high likelihood of suicides in relation
to such arrests. Families may want the whole question of homosexuality kept secret
but then again they do not always desire that in preference to their relative not having
been put into the position of suicide in the first place. And inquests are public.
I have since been told independently of the suicide so it is relatively common
knowledge.
Three days ago, two men were sentenced to 28 years jail for murdering a gay man
who was cruising on Clapham Common. I did not notice his family asking for his
gayness to be hidden. I am also reminded of the Anthony McCleave case where the
police decided the family would prefer his death to be ascribed to an accident, rather
than have his murderers caught, if that would reveal that he had been gay and was
killed cruising at night in Belfast. In the event, the family asked NIGRA to investigate
and we obtained slight justice in that an accidental verdict at the inquest was denied to
the police and some compensation obtained.
The concerns that I felt after the meeting were heightened dramatically when we
received details of answers to the various questions CoSO had posed to Assistant
Chief Constable Harris. As you know, he advised that of 59 surveillance operations
reported throughout Northern Ireland 48 had or were occurring in the Lisburn police
area. This is an amazing statistic and indicates either that Lisburn experiences 80% of
outdoor sexual activity in the province or that a hugely greater priority is put on
stopping such activity in the area, much more than anywhere else.
I note what I take to be an attempt to address the problem (or pre-empt criticism) with
Robin Dempsey’s very recent offer to write and distribute an arrest leaflet for such
distraught individuals when leaving custody. This is being taken forward.
On the question of just what law is transgressed by discreet outdoor sex, and what
level of social harm is involved, I remain uncertain and feel we should test that issue
as soon and as often as possible. The charge remaining in Northern Ireland is indecent
behaviour which by definition depends on the mood of the times as to what
constitutes indecency. It is used to prosecute public urination amongst other things.
I tried to point out that recent case law in England indicated an unwillingness to
convict in a number of such circumstances. In one instance, on appeal, the decision
was that without people personally witnessing to being offended a case had no merit.
In another, nakedness visible to others was not regarded as indecent. There was little
or no attempt by the Lisburn police to engage with that question. I feel we should take
the view that only if sexual behaviour is seriously indiscreet should charges be
considered.
In retrospect, I feel we should also have been more vigorous in testing the question of
the concerns expressed by neighbours and local residents. There are next to none
living close to the Giant’s Ring. People living in Edenderry are half a mile away. It is
not the job of the police to maintain tranquillity and harmony in neighbourhoods, by
moving along or arresting those who do not fit the profile of the residents or who
cause low level nuisance, whether perceived or actually observed. Would that it were,
I sometimes think, but life is not like that. We can best argue a case, much as Orange
marchers, in that people have no right not to be offended in shared spaces, which does
not mean we do not recognise there are limits to unacceptable behaviour by both
cruisers and residents groups.
As you know. I was counselling one of those five people and had not heard from him
for a number of days before the Lisburn meeting. For the best part of a week
afterwards when I rang him I got no answer and I became increasingly frightened. I
experienced sleepless nights assuming the worst. In the event he finally answered. So
the guy who did die, rather than his death being a failed gay counselling, was due to
no gay group being able to get to speak to him.
PA feels now that when we heard of the suicide at the meeting we ought to have
called a recess to consider our position.
I believe we should be willing to pass on any warnings that the PSNI provides of
impending actions as we may thereby prevent arrests and suicides. We can also sit on
the local committee which the Inspector proposed. But we do not want to become part
of someone’s box ticking. The position whereby the top of the PSNI agrees with us
about these old fashioned round-ups while the officers on the ground take no notice of
changed times is also of great concern and we should review our position in relation
to the police in consequence.
I saw no willingness to contemplate a scaling down or reappraisal of the Lisburn
police’s actions at the meeting despite the suicide and the arguments we made. I have
since been told that surveillance operations are under way at McKee’s Dam on the
A1. We must ask, at least, for such operations to be time limited as they could
continue indefinitely with a limitless harvest of arrests.
We must also press for informal cautions to be used in the earliest instances of
inappropriate behaviour. These do not require a prolonged agonising wait to hear if a
prosecution is to proceed or a formal caution is to be made. (Both options require the
DPP’s assent and a wait of several months). In other cases, we will accept that a
graded response from formal cautions to prosecutions would have to occur.
I intend now to write to Chief Inspector Gilmore accordingly and ask that you join
with me in the letter when it is drafted. Could you indicate now in principle if you
would be willing to sign a letter on these lines or would wish to add to or amend
anything in particular? PA is largely of the same mind as myself.
Regards
Jeff
[No response came from Rainbow, neither Andrew Wakefield or Kevin Molloy. No
letter to Gilmore sent.]