The Murder of Seamus Ludlow in County Louth, May 1976. Towards a public inquiry?

 

Home

Intro.

Introduction    to the             murder of       Seamus           Ludlow and     the official     cover-up.       

Frequently asked Questions.

Brief Review.

Profile.

British Army abduction of Kevin Donegan

An Alleged "Family Afair"

More Lies

Michael Cunningham investigation - 1978

Witness Account 1998

Ludlow Family account 1998.

Chronology.

Photographs.

The recent     Campaign       for Truth and  Justice.          

Latest Reports.

25th Anniversary.

Louth County Council Support.

BIRW Report.

BIRW Update Message.

Irish Victims Commission Report.

Hamilton - Barron  Inquiry

Barron Report Published - 3 November 2005

Ludlow family statement 5 November 2005

Oireachtas Report Published - March 2006

Ludlow family statement 29 March 2006

Ludlow family's questions for the RUC (now the PSNI)

Contributors.

Linda Porra's Editorial.

Jim J. Kane's letter to the N I Human Rights Commission.

Jim J. Kane's letter to the RUC

Press Release 

Ed Moloney radio Interview.

Ludlow Family Letter to Bertie Ahern 

Meeting the Police Ombudsman

First Inquest - 19 August 1976

A Fresh Inquest

Report of Second Inquest 5-6 September 2005

Celtic League Support

Press Coverage.

Links.

New guestmap Guest Book

View messages from our original Guestbook

Mailing List

E-Mail Form

Tell a Friend

Search this Site.

  E-Mail

Other          Ludlow        Family         Sites.          

First Ludlow Site

Domain Name Site

The Dundalk Bombing

 

 

 

Search Allof Ireland.com

 

 

 

 

29 March 2006:

PRESS STATEMENT

LUDLOW/SHARKEY FAMILY

TO CONSIDER THEIR POSITION

The family are pleased to note that the joint committee on the Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights conclude that the family have been treated in an appalling manner.

It is clear that the Committee remain deeply troubled by the many unanswered questions in the case. Indeed the Committee have identified 11 key issues which require investigation. The Family welcome the acknowledgement that there are issues of major public importance that remain to be investigated satisfactorily.

However the Family do not feel that the recommendation by the Committee that a commission of investigation be established is the correct one.

There are critical differences between a public Inquiry and the form of commission that is being recommended chief among those differences are that the work of a public Inquiry is open and transparant and all members of society can observe what transpires. It was striking that in the public hearings before the Committee major conflicts in events emerged to the public eye but of course the Committee were powerless to adjudicate on them. These conflicts are a source of significant public concern and the investigation of them should be conducted in public and not in private. The issues identified by the Committee as requiring further investigation focus on the discharge of the duties of public office in various quarters. These are we believe uniquely matters suited to public Inquiry.

A second significant issue is that in a public inquiry the Family would have a fully accredited role to play in seeing the evidence being given at first hand and testing it by cross examination where necessary the family could make informed submissions based on the possession of the same facts as the tribunal.

Public enquiries uniquely enjoy the confidence of the wider community in a way that private enquiries do not.

This very point was acknowledged by all parties when passing the Dail resolution on 8th March 2006 calling for "the immediate establishment of a full, independent public judicial Inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane, as recommended by Judge Cory, which would enjoy the full cooperation of the Family and the wider community throughout Ireland and abroad".

The Ludlow/Sharkey family believe this is the correct test and is the route that should have been recommended by the committee. It is acknowledged that a Commission of investigation has the power to recommend the holding of a tribunal of Inquiry but the family believe that this step should be taken now in the interest of speed and in recognition of the age profile of the family and all that they have suffered in almost 30 years.

The family are concerned also that it is on the record of the Committee's proceedings that some valuable sources of evidence are only prepared to cooperate with a full public Inquiry and that this vital evidence may not be available to any more limited investigation.

Accordingly the family are considering their position as to whether they should participate in a commission of investigation with a view to securing a full public Inquiry or alternatively pursue other avenues.

Disappointing though these recommendations are they will not deter the family in the pursuit of justice.

Further information  James McGuill 087 2561772

 

Find below links to excerpts of the transcript from the first day of hearings before the Oireachtas Sub-Committee on Justice:

Morning session:
10.00 am - Members of the Ludlow family
Chairman's Opening Remarks
James McGuill (Ludlow family solicitor)
Kevin Ludlow (brother of the late Seamus Ludlow)
Mrs Nan Sharkey (sister)
Mrs Eileen Fox (sister)
Michael Donegan (nephew)
Brendan Ludlow (nephew)
Mrs Briege Doyle (niece)
Jimmy Sharkey (nephew)

 

I Top

Download the Barron Report from the Oireachtas website (pdf file)

SUPPORT THE SEAMUS LUDLOW APPEAL FUND

Bank of Ireland
78 Clanbrassil Street
Dundalk
County Louth
Ireland

Account No. 70037984 

   Thank You. 

Copyright 2006 the Ludlow family. All rights reserved.
Revised: May 01, 2006