REVEALED: How the judicial system was manipulated by nationalist activists #Loughinisland

Following Friday’s Loughinisland judgement it is important to understand how the legal system was manipulated via a coordinated social and mainstream media campaign, designed to create the very perception of bias that Barra McGrory QC would later argue existed.

The entire scheme is revealed here, with a visual graph  at the bottom of this article showing exactly how the judicial system was by nationalist legacy activists.

Join over thousands of readers who are receiving our newsletter and being kept up to date with the latest news from the community
We hate spam. Your email address will not be sold or shared with anyone else.

There may be some who are blind to the manoeuvring and dirty tricks, but Unionist Voice is not. This site highlighted the contrived agenda from day one, and many sought to portray us as fools for doing so. It has now become clear that only Unionist Voice had it absolutely right, when almost every mainstream media outlet had it completely wrong.


A BBC website report, from a 2002 case involving Bernard McCloskey QC, came into possession of the Police Ombudsman on 14 December 2017. Upon receiving this information the Police Ombudsman sought advice on a potential recusal application. Within 24 hours it was advised that a recusal application would not be appropriate. The Police Ombudsman accepted this. This position was reaffirmed by the Police Ombudsman on 8 January 2018 (AFTER false Irish Times article).

The interested party in the case, represented by Niall Murphy, a Sinn Fein election activist, became aware of the BBC article on the 21 December 2017. No action was taken at this time.


Due to the position of the Police Ombudsman, represented by Tony McGleenan QC, that there were no grounds for a recusal application, this left the interested party in a situation whereby they desperately sought to derail the case and believed a recusal application, to muddy the waters, was a viable method of achieving such an outcome.

The interested parties legal representatives leaked the details of the BBC report that had come into their possession to John Ware, a reporter who had participated in the controversial ‘No Stone Unturned’ documentary relating to Loughinisland. John Ware, naturally, had a professional interest in ensuring the Ombudsman’s report remained intact, due to his involvement in the documentary based upon stolen reports from the Police Ombudsman’s office.

On the 6 January 2018 John Ware published an article in the Irish Times claiming that Mr Justice McCloskey had previously represented one on the applicants in the Loughinisland case, Mr Raymond White, in a similar case. Almost instantly a co-ordinated social media campaign swung into action, raising the question of potential bias. This co-ordinated action was led by legacy activists linked to the interested parties legal team, nationalist victims groups, Sinn Fein and those linked to the Loughinisland documentary.

The genesis of the ‘perceived bias’ therefore is Mr Ware’s article, which was spoon fed to the Irish Times by the interested parties legal team. However, as this website pointed out at the time (and were the only outlet to do so), Mr Ware’s story contained a whopping lie; namely the assertion Mr Justice McCloskey had represented Raymond White in the 2002 Omagh case. He had not.

Despite the genesis of this perceived bias being based on a complete lie, many other media outlets continued to report this lie as fact. Unionist Voice continued to point out they had all got it horribly wrong.

The Judgement by Mr Justice McCloskey delivered on 25 January 2018 makes abundantly clear that he did NOT represent Raymond White in the 2002 case. It is clearly spelt out. It reads;

“Mr White was NOT party to the 2002 litigation and, therefore, was NOT represented by any legal practitioner, solicitor or counsel”

This is clear and unambiguous language within Mr Justice McCloskey’s judgement. Many media outlets, and specifically the Irish Times and the BBC, stated as fact that Mr Justice McCloskey previously represented one of the applicants in the 2002 case. Either the media have got it horribly wrong, and thus fed the perception of bias whipped up around this case, or else a High Court judge has blatantly lied in a written judgement. There is no middle ground, and it is important that the facts are absolutely clear and this deception, initiated by John Ware in the Irish Times, is not allowed to be concealed in the smoke and noise arising from the overall judgement.

So, let us succinctly sum up the chain of events leading to the public ‘perception of bias’, which then led the Police Ombudsman to sack Tony McGleenan QC and replace him with Barra McGrory QC, a man closely linked with the interested parties interests. The below chart highlights the genesis of the lie, how it was used to feed the public perception and ultimately to bounce the Police Ombudsman into sacking Tony McGleenan QC and replacing him with the overtly nationalist leaning Barra McGrory QC.


Since you’re here…

… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Unionist Voice than ever but unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as open as we can.

The Unionist Voice is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias. No one edits our Editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important because it enables us to give a voice to the voiceless, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical.

f everyone who reads our reporting, who likes it, helps to support it, our future would be much more secure. For as little as £1, you can support the Unionist Voice– and it only takes a minute. Thank you.

Support Us