IT was up to the Sunday Times to prove its allegations against the plaintiff, Mr Albert Reynolds, in this trial, his counsel, Lord Gareth Williams QC, told the jury in the High Court in London yesterday.
The paper had claimed he had: "dishonestly misled" the Dail.
"What lies did he tell? What dishonesty was there? They have to prove it. He had to prove nothing."
Mr Reynolds is suing the Sunday Times for an article entitled "Goodbye, Gombeen Man", published in the British editions of the paper on November 20th, 1994, which said: "How a fib too far proved fatal for Ireland's peacemaker and Mr Fixit."
The Sunday Times is denying libel, pleading justification. The case was quite simple, said Lord Williams. The Sunday Times had done Mr Reynolds a "great wrong", and had never said that small word "sorry".
"They thought Albert Reynolds's back was broken. They were wrong. They thought, he's not Taoiseach any more, we can have some sport and let's give Albert a kicking," he said.
Referring to the criticism of Mr Reynolds in Irish newspapers at the time, he asked the jury: "Have you heard any suggestion that any paper said one thing there and another thing here? That's what makes this case different."
The reason Mr Reynolds was suing in London and not in Dublin was a legal one, he said. If one copy of the offending article had been published "in the meanest little newsagent in a backstreet of Dublin", he could have sued there. The conduct of the case was shameful. "Take a smear, add a pinch of tittle tattle, stir it all up and what do you get? A mess.
"Has anyone said anything to Albert Reynolds about the good he has done? I didn't hear it. He has had four days of cross examination and a day and more of abuse and half truth and he took it.
"They ask who remembers Albert Reynolds now? I'll tell you who does. Quite a lot of people in the Republic of Ireland and thousands in Northern Ireland who from 31st August 1994 to 16th February this year didn't have to think, `is my father coming home?' They can sneer as much as they like, and they did. How dare they, in the light of his achievements."
He listed eight things a "decent journalist" would do when writing a story as important as this one.
He would go to the best sources, as had Vincent Browne when writing the article published in the Irish edition of the paper. He would carefully research all sides, not just rely on a "snake in the grass who had his own agenda and won't have his name attached to his allegations of lies".
He would talk to those directly involved, in this case Mr Dick Spring, Mr Brendan Howlin and Mr Eoghan Fitzsimons, named as Mr Reynolds's "accusers". Not a single one of them was asked. Nor were ministers Noel Dempsey, Charlie McCreevy or Ma ire Geoghegan Quinn approached.
He would try to check the facts carefully. "He had the time. It was a Sunday paper and he was working on it since Tuesday," he said. He would publish what he claimed was the truth both in Britain and in Ireland. "The truth is the truth is the truth. It doesn't alter just because you take a place to London or Belfast."
He would take careful notes. "The melancholy fact is that Mr Ruddock took no note at all. He said he wasn't in note taking mode, whatever that means.
Finally, if he got it wrong, he would put it right. "His final score is nought out of eight."
In his citing of Irish newspapers, Mr Price had omitted one - his own client's as published in the Irish Republic. "Mr Price was not able to go to the Irish article of his own client's newspaper because as soon as he does, a mine explodes and it destroys them. When you consider this case I ask you to go through this article and see where the truth was, because Vincent Browne ferreted it out."
Referring to the calling of witnesses, he said the Sunday Times never called Vincent Browne. "They knew he would have destroyed them.
He drew attention to an article in the Sunday Times by Mr Browne published a year ago in which he said there had been no concealment of significant facts to the Dail. No reason had been given why Mr Spring and the other "accusers" did not give evidence for the Sunday Times.
"Is it because somewhere inside them they think Mr Reynolds was indeed wronged?"
He said the Sunday Times had not proved Mr Reynolds had lied to the Dail or his Cabinet colleagues. "What we have is a saga of political incompetence.