Sir Michael Havers QC and the Cabinet
A man and counsel (senior) without flaw – He was the staff planted in the riverbed who stuck up so firm and showed us all how the current flowed: the true current
Sir Michael Havers QC the Attorney General (1979-‐1987) the cabinet and the Irish Republican terrorists murders on our mainland.
The Tory Administrations (1979-‐1997) sanctioned very few prosecutions of these Irish Terrorists for murder committed on the mainland. I conclude the Cabinet in London was against such trials in our Central Criminal Court and other Crown Courts. Sir Michael and his successor Sir Ian Percival QC were basically told to lay off these atrocious murders. Likewise the British police who are the best in the world were told to follow the same line. Our police don’t disobey political orders from such high cabinet level but these police (senior officers) would never suppress incriminating evidence for such atrocities in England – fair England. Our director and Sir Michael had to tow this laid down by the cabinet. There were many Irish terrorist murders in this period (1979-‐1997) on our mainland beginning Airey Neave MP/MC assassination in the House of Commons carpark exit shortly before the 1979 (May) general election (Won by Tory Margaret Thatcher) If the cabinet at the highest level had approved such terrorism prosecutions they would have materialised. Our police would have found the evidence and Sir Michael would have led for the Crown himself in court or other suitable senior Crown counsel would have been instructed in the 1980’s and 1990’s to take his place. I have no doubt any of that/ Sir Michael had the backing: moral of the criminal bar and our High Court Bench of Judges from 1970 to 1987 when he ceased to be Attorney and became Lord Chancellor in the Lords. He had the “power” to successfully prosecute these Irish Republican Terrorists for these dreadful murders “within himself” and by his bravery and astute judgement of the facts and defendants in court. He had shown that in Guilford four trials.
Why was there such a pavcity of trials in London and England for these mainland murders based on political violence?
The Guildford Four bombers were convicted of multiple murders in 1974/75 at the Old Bailey prosecuted by Sir Michael. It appears the hullaballoo surrounding this trial which blew up in the 1980’s stimulated by the media and the defendants “supporters” led the cabinet to go quiet on the Irish Terrorists trials. Our Country is ruled by the cabinet in London, not by the Director and Attorney in such grave matters. Effectively the cabinet lost confidence not in Sir Michael who had true candour and calibre, but in their own authorisation of these very serious trials which, if they misfired, could bring destroyed prestige down on these Tory administrations in England and abroad. Sir Michael was willing, but the cabinet were worried men and women “paralysed” by anxiety and indecision. Margaret Thatcher PM MP could not drive the decision to try these Irish terrorists through her cabinet. She was outvoted if truth be told. The legendary “Iron Lady” was left isolated. The attorney was not in the cabinet in Sir Michael’s day. A political decision was taken not to prosecute (a “nolle prosequi” in truth) at the highest level prompted by fears over this Guildford Four trial and the safety of those convictions which had been conducted by Sir Michael himself for the crown.
The Good Friday Agreement political strategy was applicable in the 1980’s: we have to make peace one day. Thus the cabinet did not wish to “rock the boat” and exacerbate matters by more mainland trials of Irish Republican Terrorists, which that lobby would seek to discredit and use against the cabinet. The Good Friday accords bought some sort of peace at end of the 1990’s. The price of that policy not to prosecute was to lessen and tarnish the utter strength and pure fairness of our bar in England coupled to derailing the direct English criminal crown counsel advocacy which has suffered on the back of the Guildford Four, Maguire seven and Birmingham six appeals. You cannot have criminal justice so clinical it is hermetically sealed. There must be a fair trial for the accused and the crown. The result must be in doubt or we remove the essence of that trial. Where there is murder in England we expect those murderers to be arraigned. Plainly that did not occur in these Irish Republican mainland cases.
The Death Penalty All these mainland Irish Terrorist murders were in reality and morality hanging cases if we had Capital Punishment for murder conviction. These culprits did not die in action and survived to tell the tale. The cabinet knew this and realised prosecutions without the Death Sentence for such serious murders were meaningless. Sir Michael knew this better than anyone. He understood the extraordinary “puissant” of hanging and how it rightly empowered the trial judge at the end of the case. His own father Sir Cecil Havers had hanged Ruth Ellis in 1955, when he was himself criminal Bar in London. The cabinet like it or not, was weakened without the Death Sentence/ trials for murder had no real purpose for these Irish Terrorists who in morality should be hanged. The cabinet were not properly “bothered”/ they had become prepared to discount such murders. There was nothing at stake. Let these terrorists of Irish Republicanism go free, that was the thinking in the London cabinet room. This is the terrible logic and immorality of the abolition philosophy/ Sir Michael, not at the cabinet table, had the Prime Minister, as his ally, on my argument, not to restore hanging, but still to try these Irish Terrorists for these very grave multiple murders. Only Sir Michael and Margaret Thatcher had the courage of their convictions in this period (1979-‐1987) of Sir Michael as Attorney General. Our non-‐capital punishment policy had sapped the strength of the British cabinet in those very serious times for our government and our people. We did not have the will to arraign these Irish Terrorist murdered any kind should never be overlooked in the realm of England and Wales, or we become subservient and lackeys to our enemies.
24th Nov 2017
R.M Lamb Esq, Temon Esate