Forgotten Soldiers: The Irishmen Shot at Dawn: Book Review

Publishers - Gill & McMillan

Note:  The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl is not involved or linked in anyway with this publication.

A book entitled Forgotten Soldiers: The Irishmen Shot at Dawn written by BBC Northern Ireland journalist Stephen Walker was launched in Belfast on Thursday the 25^th October 2007. The author makes reference on many occasions to the Farr case and it being a landmark case (legal) in a way that suggests the Farr case was the pre-eminent factor along with the effort of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign in the final resolution of the pardons issue. In consequence, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl owe it to our support base throughout Ireland and further afield to point out the following:

In their embellished press release promoting Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn By Stephen Walker, the publishers state:

Press Release: Twenty-eight Irishmen were executed by the British Army during the First World War for desertion and disobedience:

• There are only 26 British soldiers Shot at Dawn recorded as being from Ireland and not 28 as published in Gill & McMillan's press release. Although we suspect that many more of the total of 306 Shot at Dawn for Military Offences had Irish connections or had been born in Ireland.

• Private Harry Hendricks, 2nd Battalion, Leinster Regiment - Shot at Dawn on the 23^rd August 1918.  Harry was born in America and had volunteered for service in an Irish Regiment. Source Shot at Dawn By Julian Putkowski and Julian Sykes first published 1989, Leo Cooper, page 254.

• Private Albert Rickman, 1^st Battalion, Royal Dublin Fusiliers - Shot at Dawn 15th September 1916. Albert was born in Hampshire. Source Commonwealth War Graves Debt of Honor Register.

----------------------------------------------

Press Release: For decades the full story of how the Irishmen died has largely remained a secret, but now one of the most controversial chapters in British military history can at last be told:

• Other books, press articles and different reports have been in the public domain since the 1980's with information on the Shot at Dawn. The Shot at Dawn websites have also included information re the courts-martials etc.

----------------------------------------------

Press Release: Forgotten Soldiers is the first book to chronicle how relatives and campaigners fought to clear the men’s names:

• The chronicle of events relating to the different campaigns has been on British and Irish websites for many years. Taking into account that no formal interview took place with those running the Irish campaign, ie  the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl,  it is very difficult to comprehend as to how the publishers can make this claim in the light of concerns. Forgotten Soldiers, the book, does not tell the full story of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl. For the record, our views are outlined below:

The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl:

1. An extract from book Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, reproduced in the Belfast Telegraph on Friday the 26^th October 2007,  states inter alia, Peter Mulvany had recently established the Irish branch of the Shot at Dawn group. Founded on the 27^th June 2002, The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl co-ordinated by the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46)  is an independent Irish based group and not part or an adjunct of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign. To link the Irish SAD group with the UK end in this way is perverse and untrue. The Shot at Dawn Campaign Ireland and the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK are two separate and distinct groups; ie one Irish campaign and one British campaign independent of each other, albeit in pursuit of the same objective. Our unique Irish identity was a major contributing factor and was one of the reasons why the Irish SAD Campaign was so successful in attracting support.

2. In the book Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, a group image copyrighted to the Department of Foreign Affairs/Maxwell's has the caption sanitized. In the original Maxwell's caption published in the Irish Times March 2006, one is described as Peter Mulvany who heads the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign. In the book Forgotten Soldiers, Peter Mulvany is now described in the caption opposite page 115, as  Peter Mulvany Irish Shot at Dawn Campaigner with a photo of the British Shot at Dawn Campaign founder neatly placed at the top of the page with his appropriate title. A mischievous attempt by the author to link the Irish Campaign with the British Campaign. Peter Mulvany is the coordinator of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl to give our independent Irish based group its proper title. We are not associated with any British Pardons Campaign, Shot at Dawn Campaign or other similar British group.

3. On Page 194 , the author states with reference to the then Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr Brian Cowen TD that he examined the arguments and in November 2003 announced that the government was supporting the Shot at Dawn Campaign and wanted the British government to pardon the twenty-six Irish-born soldiers. The Press Release Issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs on the 14^th November 2003 in support of the pardons for our 26 Irish born soldiers, specifically expressed support on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Brian Cowen T.D., for the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign, and not the Shot at Dawn Campaign, as stated by Walker. In his press release, the Minister highlights correctly the two separate campaign structures ie   'The Shot at Dawn Campaign, based in Britain', and the 'The Shot at Dawn Campaign (Irl), coordinated by Mr Peter Mulvany'. Walker is again attempting to obfuscate the role of the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign effort to the detriment of our Irish support base. Reading through the book one is left with the distinct impression that the empire mindset still pervades in some quarters. The Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign based in Dublin was, is and has always been, a separate campaign to the British Pardons Campaign, albeit with the same objectives... as Walker well knows. Indeed one should put the question as to why the full Irish Government Report is not included in the appendix of his book along with all the Irish Government press releases and extracts of Dail and Seanad contributions from Irish politicians who showed their support for the efforts of the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign? After all,  they are also entitled to a share of the collective credit for their collective effort on the pardons issue.  Other publications written about world war one subjects manage to include extensive appendices..interesting omission..never mind, we have all the Irish political contributions recorded on this website at  Irish Government Support.

4. On Page 200 the author states that as Peter Mulvany left the service he bumped into a politician who was a supporter of the pardons campaign. When the subject was raised Mulvany was told, 'The pardons are on the way'. An interesting assertive comment of a fact. The author is referring to a private meeting with an Irish politician which took place on the 1st July 2006 in the Irish National War Memorial in Islandbridge, Dublin,  at the Somme Commemoration. Firstly it should be noted that Walker does not have any footnote attached to this statement to indicate his source. Irrespective, the politician concerned is indeed a staunch supporter of the pardons campaign Irish and British campaign efforts however he was engaged in conversation with others when I introduced myself to thank him for his support and not bump into him as stated by Walker. In contrast, this politician advised that they will get the pardons in the end referring to our families and not the fact that the pardons were on the way. One never pursued him further to find out his source or corroborate his comments. Statements like these were a regular occurrence at the time as rumours were rife that the Farr case would have to go to a full hearing in September 2006 because of the chinese walls being put up by the Ministry of Defence to any amicable resolution to the pardons issue.

5. Note:  In his book Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, by Stephen Walker, Peter Mulvany is quoted in various interview notes by the author.  Although a meeting did take place in Dublin with Stephen Walker, Peter Mulvany was never formally interviewed by Walker for his book.

The Farr Case - A Cause Célèbre ?

In a Pro Bono application in May of 2005, Mr Justice Stanley Burnton found that there was 'room for argument' that he (Private Harry Farr) had been wrongly refused a conditional pardon. However Mr Justice Burnton also declared inter alia that the family of Private Farr lacked the legal grounds for a free pardon......thereby ruling out the *free pardon/full pardon option in a leading case which many observers believe to be one of the most deserving of a free pardon/full pardon.  Significantly, Mr Justice Burnton's opinion effectively raised the legal bar by setting a precedent insofar as future applications for pardons in world war one execution cases would only be dealt with on the basis of the 'room for argument' principle via the conditional pardon route...legally capping future British political outcomes to the pardons issue.  Consequently, the legal limitations of the 'room for argument' principle via the conditional pardon  route first enunciated by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr case in May 2005, are now reflected in the 2006 British Pardons Amendment. *A free pardon/full pardon is understood to mean a pardon not encumbered by any expressly stated constraint or weighted legal, parliamentary or royal impediment narrowing its scope or effect.

The Ministry of Defence did not lose the Farr case as asserted by Andrew MacKinlay MP and others.  The Farr case had never reached a final conclusion and had not gone forward for a full hearing, indeed the preliminary opinion of Mr Justice Burnton in the initial application in May 2005 had already raised the legal bar to any future action by the British Government/MoD. Rather than resolving the issue the consequence of the Farr application in May 2005 effectively ruled out the full pardon option in all WW1 execution cases and any expected British political response to the Irish Government Report was re-routed and parked down a British legal cul de sac for nearly two years, and not several months as stated, thereby taking the pressure off the British Government at a critical time in the Irish campaign. The introduction of the PARDONS FOR SERVICEMEN EXECUTED FOR DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES: RECOGNITION AS VICTIMS OF FIRST WORLD WAR on the 7^th November 2006 is the British Government's official response to the Irish Government Report into the execution of the Irish Shot at Dawn 1914-18 encumbered by the limitations set out in May 2005 by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr application.

It should also be noted that in November 2003 following the initial Irish Government support for the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl effort. A meeting took place in Newcastle, England with the leader of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign. He gave his assurance that no legal action was envisaged/considered or being taken in the UK, as to do so in our opinion, would have frustrated future Irish Government efforts and divert the Irish campaign down a British legal cul-de-sac. The Irish effort then proceeded on the basis that no legal action was being taken in the UK by the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign or the UK Families. The legal application in the Farr Case May 2005 (significantly post the presentation of the Irish Government Report in October 2004) patently breached that assurance. As a consequence:

1. the Irish Government Report was diverted down a British legal cul-de-sac before any political response could be extracted from the British Government which suited the MoD agenda at the time;

2. initiated the 'room for argument' principle via the conditional pardon route...legally capping future British political outcomes to the pardons issue;

3. legally and politically ruled out any chance of ever achieving a full pardon for our Irish born Shot at Dawn, to the detriment of our Irish families;

4. undermined the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign effort.

It is inconceivable that the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign were unaware of the preparation for the Farr case as expert knowledge was needed to prepare the legal briefs which was only accessible through the UK SAD campaign effort. The facts are, the Farr Pro Bono application in May 2005 is responsible for blocking the full pardon route for all our world war one Shot at Dawn, thereby eliminating the possibility of a full pardon for our Irish Shot at Dawn, to the detriment of our Irish Families, leaving them in a British legal and political vacuum. The Farr case had never reached a final conclusion or gone forward for a full hearing to test their legal argument for a conditional pardon, and for Walker and others in the UK to flag the Farr case as a Cause Célèbre is at the very least imprudent and a British distortion of the facts.

• On Tuesday 20^th November 2007, the grandnephew of Private Patrick Joseph Downey one of our 26 Irish Born soldiers, Shot at Dawn, submitted his application to Her Majesty, The Queen, for a Royal Pardon for Patrick. He states “In our families opinion, without the added weight of the royal prerogative of mercy such conditional pardon is meaningless”

----------------------------------------------

War Shame Ended Shame of Daughter an article by Henry McDonald, Ireland Correspondent, The Observer, Sunday October 28, 2007, with extracts from Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn. a book by Stephen Walker, states inter alia

 'For the first time, former War Veterans' Minister Tom Watson has admitted his meeting with Harris in the summer of 2006 prompted him to force the MoD to change policy and grant her father and other shell-shocked troops a pardon';

To state or imply that it was this meeting that forced a change in British government policy on the pardons in isolation to all other efforts, is incredibly naive at best and downright insulting to all involved in supporting the campaign for pardons, in particular, the crucial role of the Irish government's international diplomatic effort towards the final resolution of the pardons issue.

RTE TV Irish Television 'Would You Believe Special Documentary - Shot at Dawn - 9th November 2008:

On Sunday the 9th November 2008 a 'Would You Believe' special television documentary was transmitted to launch the Irish remembrance week schedule. As some pundits continue to ignore or minimise the Irish Governments role towards the successful resolution of the pardons issue, the following inter alia might be taken into account whenever discussions arise as to who did what and when :

• All the names of the Irish Shot at Dawn were included in the Commonwealth War Graves Register for many years. However, the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn were not included in the separate Irish War Memorial Register and until recently had been totally excluded from Irish records.

• On the 28th October 2004, a highly sensitive confidential report into the execution of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn during world war one, was submitted to the British Government by the Irish Government. Despite a freedom of information request from a British Newspaper in 2005 and continued requests to have the Irish report released the British Government steadfastly refused to release its contents.

• On Tuesday 28th March 2006 the Irish Government, against British objections, and pursuant to an Irish Seanad Debate, unilaterally released their report into the executions of our 26 Irish Shot at Dawn, in order to facilitate and inform debate in the UK and in particular, to support the Irish Shot at Dawn effort to achieve Pardons for our 26 Irish executed.

• On the 15th August 2006 the Irish Government was contacted through diplomatic channels, to advise that the British intended to initiate legislation to grant pardons to all the 306, in particular the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn. It was conveyed to the Irish Government, that this Pardons Legislation was the Official British Government Response to the Irish Government Report, submitted to the Ministry of Defence via the Foreign and Commonwealth office, in late 2004. 

• Through diplomatic channels, the Irish Government persuaded the British Government to expand the effects of their pardons legislation by inter alia having the pardons inscribed on all the individual courts martial files, to acknowledge the effects of the Pardons legislation.

• Private Harry Farr was the first recipient and beneficiary of this acknowledgement and his immediate family were issued a certificate in recognition of his pardon.

• Private Harry Farr was pardoned together along with all the other lads executed. To suggest or imply that he was pardoned prior to the introduction of the pardons legislation or that Harry Farr was the first to be pardoned which in turn led to the other soldiers being pardoned, is blatantly untrue and very misleading.

• The pardons granted were effective when her Majesty signed the legislation into law on Wednesday 8th November 2006, following its passage through the House of Commons. All 306 executed for military offences during world war one were pardoned together, pursuant to this legislation

It is regrettable that the Irish Government's key role in this unique change of British policy is continually being ignored and minimised in particular by British connections. Consequently, as we were closely involved, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl will vigorously rebut any erroneous statement/spin placed on the public record about the separate Irish campaign effort, irrespective of source. It should be noted for the record, that previous attempts by those involved in the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, had failed to convince the Irish Government to support the pardons issue prior to June 2001. A separate all Ireland 'Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl' unconnected with the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, set up and based in Dublin, was ultimately successful in persuading the Irish authorities to support the issue on behalf of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn. Apparently, there are some individuals and other groups only too willing to claim the credit for the effort done by  others, indeed there are still those who credit the success of the Irish Campaign directly to the existence of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, which is grossly unfair to our support base. Consequently, in the interests of the historical record, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl will continue to set that record straight. This website may provide other information of relevance at http://www.shotatdawncampaignirl.org/

The British Pardons Campaign:

In 1998, the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign was effectively dead in the water as a result of John Reid's refusal to countenance any pardons. It was the Irish campaign effort that made the difference and but for the Irish governments input, the Farr case and the British Pardons Campaign would still be languishing in the cul-de-sac of the British political and legal system ad infinitum. To claim or imply otherwise is perverse.

Irrespective, we have always been of the view because of the mosaic involving various individuals, groups, organizations, politicians and governments etc, who supported and became involved in the resolution to the pardons issue, that all regardless of contribution, are fully entitled to their share of the collective credit for their collective effort...and especially not forgetting the 76 year old Belfast pensioner and her elderly friends who deliberately crossed the sectarian divide in 2004 to get support for our Irish petition to pardon our 26 Irish Shot at Dawn..the success and credit also belongs to them....bless em. Are these courageous elderly ladies from Northern Ireland not also entitled to share in the credit?   There are many examples of elderly pensioners and elderly veterans living throughout Ireland who supported the Irish campaign. Are they not also entitled to share in the credit?...is their contribution to go unrecorded?

The ability of Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl to attract all Ireland support for pardons from all sections across the sectarian divide for our 26 Shot at Dawn British soldiers, albeit Irish born (and taking into account that we were coming out of a conflict situation with the Irish troubles in our recent past), is a testament to the goodwill, common sense and humanitarian approach of all the Irish people. The subsequent involvement of the Irish government and the production of its own report into the executions of our 26 British soldiers is a seismic historical development and its affect on Anglo-Irish relations is apparently still not fully understood by some British commentators and scribes etc.

The successful holding of the Somme Commemoration in the National War Memorial Gardens, Dublin, on Saturday 1^st July 2006 did not go unnoticed by our British friends. In the absence of any agreement on the Irish peace process, the unified support for the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl on the pardons issue, promoted the principle of all Ireland agreement, albeit on a single issue. Ironically the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign had achieved a consensus on the island of Ireland for its objectives, in a divided political and religious environment where no other subject matter had attracted such all Ireland agreement in recent memory. All Ireland agreement which = Irish peace process which = final settlement of the Irish question which = Tony Blair's place in history, as he was about to leave office as British Prime Minister. To suggest or imply that it was the heartbreaking story from a wonderful old lady, accompanied by tea, tears and sympathy courtesy of  that very sympathetic organization, the British Ministry of  Defence, which was the tipping point that led to the pardons, is stretching things, a wee bit. The Ministry of Defence have never been intimidated  by such niceties and have always battened down the hatches when under pressure. So what was the real motivation?  The British have never given anything away unless they see a benefit in return, and any policy/action they undertake will always be in the British National and Strategic Interest. It was all elementary dear Watson, elementary, the Irish peace process and Blair's place in history with the final settlement of the Irish question in place was the tipping point, ie the resolution of the pardons issue in the context of the Irish peace process.................for slow learners.

We were assured from the outset by Walker that he wanted his book to be a book of record, and it was on that basis that we gave our support. Regretably, far from being the tome of record which one hoped it would be, Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, a book by BBC Northern Ireland journalist Stephen Walker, seems to be nothing more than another British spin to suit a British audience......facile largire de alieno.

Re an Irish Pardon for Irish born British soldiers Shot at Dawn:

Re an Irish Pardon for Irish born British soldiers Shot at Dawn: On the pretext that such a measure would be persuasive in encouraging a British Government to look more sympathetically at the pardons issue it was suggested during the campaign particularly by Andrew Mackinlay MP and some individuals in the UK associated with the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, that the Irish Government should independently proceed and pardon all our Irish born executed British soldiers irrespective of any British determination on the matter, effectively calling for an Irish panacea to a British dilemma prior to any final adjudication in the Farr case and significantly without consulting with the Irish campaign effort ignoring our concerns. Those that mooted such a course of action should note the following. Constitutional obstacles and political sensitivities would have dictated that any pardon an Irish Government might have considered would only have effected those Irish born in the Republic of Ireland, would have excluded those who were born in Northern Ireland, would not have effected the soldiers courts martial file it being held by the Ministry of Defence outside Irish jurisdiction, and taking into account historical concerns would ultimately have been divisive. Such an Irish pardon is, and was, never worth a penny candle, and if introduced would have needlessly jeopardised the interests of our Irish families during a very sensitive time in the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign. It is to their inestimable credit that the Irish Government took the advice of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl resisted that pressure and disregarded those UK representations on behalf of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, a decision later vindicated by the introduction of the 2006 British Pardons Amendment.

Other Issues:

• On Wednesday morning of the 9^th November 2005, post a special preview of the first production of The Worthless Soldier, a play about the execution of Private Bernard McGeehan in Londonderry/Derry, a Mr John McGeehan was closely questioned by students in the audience from the nearby school as to his precise relationship to Bernard. Mr McGeehan did not answer the question put insofar as he believed his father was a cousin of a cousin of Private McGeehan. Indeed Mr McGeehan's response was met by a stoical and embarrassing silence from the young audience and his answer was unconvincing to say the least;

• On Wednesday 16^th August 2006 in the South Wales Argus, Mr McGeehan is quoted, re Private McGeehan, that he was 'elated' the name of his great-uncle had been cleared;

• On Wednesday 16^th August 2006 a BBC News extract refers to John McGeehan, as Pte McGeehan's second cousin.  His second cousin, John McGeehan, is a member of the Shot at Dawn campaign group;

• On Friday, 21^st August  2006 in the Derry Journal Pardon for Derry man 'Shot at Dawn' Mr McGeehan' is quoted as being a cousin of Bernard McGeehan;

• A letter published in the Donegal Journal dated 31^st March 2006 entitled Shot at Dawn - The Donegal Connection interestingly asserted that In the Public Records Office in Kew there was only scraps of information on Private McGeehan, quoting an address in Liverpool. A reference to a total lack of available information on Private Bernard McGeehan.

• November 2006: In a letter formulated to reflect the Shot at Dawn families backing for the pardons amendment, relatives were invited to append their support and indicate their relationship to each Shot at Dawn soldier. Interestingly, Mr John McGeehan described himself as being a relative of Private Bernard McGeehan.  This very wide description is totally inconsistent to Mr McGeehan's previous emphatic assertions of relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan.

• On page 89 in the book Forgotten Soldiers, the Irish men Shot at Dawn by Stephen Walker, the author asserts that John McGeehan is a second cousin of Bernard's. Where is the documentary evidence?

To state that ones father is a cousin of a cousin of Private Bernard McGeehan, and then in the same breath to describe Private McGeehan as being ones great-uncle, and then in another instance as being a cousin of Private McGeehan, then a second cousin, is blatantly inconsistent and plainly a genealogical impossibility. You cannot be a great-nephew and a cousin second or otherwise of Private Bernard McGeehan at the same time. Just because one appears to have the same surname does not necessarily mean a relationship does exist, irrespective as to how desirable that is. Regretably, there are just to many inconsistencies in Mr McGeehan's story, raising doubts as to his relationship, if any, with Private Bernard McGeehan.

• On page 85 in the book Forgotten Soldiers, the Irish men Shot at Dawn by Stephen Walker. The author asserts so the family (a reference to the McGeehan family) decided to leave their home in the north and move south to a house in the North Strand Road, Dublin. This information could only have been sourced from Mr McGeehan in Wales. For the record, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl sought  to identify the previous owners/tenants of a residence in Annesley Place, North Strand Road, Dublin, the address given by Mr McGeehan as the previous domicile of Private Bernard McGeehan, before he was supposed to have gone to Liverpool to join up. Ironically, as one of our friends now owns this house we had no difficulty in cross checking the title deeds and other documentation, which revealed, that no McGeehan's had ever lived in this location. We rechecked other dwellings in the adjacent area for the time frame and only one name similar lived in Annesley Place, however, not of the same spelling and importantly was not within the time frame given by Mr McGeehan. Interestingly when we communicated this to Mr McGeehan he then advised that there must be some family living in Dublin perhaps the McGeehan's had lived in Howth, County Dublin. Speculation is not corroboration. To preserve the integrity of our Irish campaign effort, we owe it to our other genuine Irish relatives to have such claims corroborated.. Irrespective as to whether there are other McGeehan's who may have been domiciled in the area of the North Strand (or domiciled in the greater Dublin area, or in Londonderry/Derry, or in Donegal, or in Belfast or Cork, or the McGeehan's listed in the 1901 and 1911 census records or anywhere else in Ireland or the UK), it is the production of documentary evidence corroborating a direct connection to the soldier in question which is the issue, and it is up to Mr John McGeehan to produce that documentary evidence to support his contention of a relationship between himself and Private Bernard McGeehan. Despite on several occasions putting it to Mr McGeehan that his relationship to Bernard is very very watery, he has to date, not produced one shred of documentary evidence confirming his relationship to this Irish born Shot at Dawn soldier.

Since 2005, Mr McGeehan from Northern Ireland and now located in the UK, has continually represented himself to the general media et al, as a relative of Private Bernard McGeehan, thereby adroitly attaching himself on the back of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign and by default attaching himself via the back door with the independent Shot at Dawn Campaign Ireland effort, to the detriment of our Irish based support. Despite conveying our concerns, todate, Mr John McGeehan  has not proved to our satisfaction his relationship to any of the 26 Irish Shot at Dawn. Consequently, we must advise caution in dealing with this source. Over the years some individuals for various reasons have made claims of relationship to the Irish Shot at Dawn, unfortunately, very few have been able to corroborate such claims and such claims usually evaporate and come to nothing.

• Note: The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl reserve the right not to accept such unsubstantiated claims of relationship to any of our Irish Shot at Dawn on face value alone and furthermore we also reserve the right to advise our viewers, families and support base, to exercise caution in dealing with any individual who makes such unsubstantiated claims of relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn.

   

  ---

Friday - 30 November 2007:

Although these questions about Mr McGeehan's relationship to Private McGeehan were first raised in 2005 and noting that uptill Friday 30^th November 2007, no documentary evidence has been produced by Mr McGeehan to substantiate his claim, irrespective, if by the 1^st January 2008, Mr John McGeehan can substantiate to us through documentary evidence, his claim of relationship as either a grandnephew, second cousin or cousin to Private Bernard McGeehan, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl will issue a fulsome apology and note same on our website, together with making a large monetary donation to an Irish cancer charity of his choice. In the circumstances, we believe it is reasonable to again put the following question, if there is a relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan, where is the documentary evidence?

Saturday - 6 March 2010 : Latest Update:

  To date, Saturday - 6 March 2010, despite communicating our concerns, not one shred of documentary evidence has been produced by Mr John McGeehan to corroborate his purported relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan, one of our 26 Irish born British Soldiers, Shot at Dawn for military offences during world war one. It is noted that as a response to our criticism, a website linked to the Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign asserted (and one assumes with the support of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign) that:

• Mr McGeehan is the second cousin of Private Bernard McGeehan, and

• He is asserting his right, as a family member, to participate in activities compatible with the restoration of his cousin's good name and honour.

We put the question again to all concerned. Where is the documentary evidence corroborating Mr McGeehan’s relationship as the cousin, second cousin, family member, grandnephew, relative or whatever of Private Bernard McGeehan? Asserting that Mr McGeehan was born in the Republic of Ireland is a total irrelevance, a statement designed to link him with the Irish campaign and obfuscate the issue. (Mr McGeehan has been resident in the UK for some considerable time and is understood to be a member, inter alia, of the British Labour Party and has no connections whatsoever with the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl either through the front or the back door. Under no circumstances does Mr McGeehan represent the Irish effort or our families and in particular he does not represent the McGeehan family).

One would have thought that after three years Mr John McGeehan might now be in a position to put forward documentary evidence to satisfy a simple basic requirement, i.e. that all claims of relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn must be corroborated through documentary evidence, in order to prevent spurious claimants passing themselves off as family. Consequently we offer the following observations for attention:

1. Is it not a moral imperative for such documentary evidence to be produced?

2. Is it not therefore reasonable, in the circumstances, to put this question to prospective claimants in order to ascertain their bona fides?

3. Are the Shot at Dawn Campaign groups not under an obligation, indeed a duty to our executed soldiers and our surviving bona fide relatives, to seek the production of such documentary evidence in order to validate claims of relationship?

Out of respect to surviving families, the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign is not prepared to accept an assertion of relationship to one of our Irish Shot at Dawn soldiers on face value alone.

Incredibly Mr McGeehan’s uncorroborated claim of relationship to Private McGeehan has clearly impressed others in the UK, which gave him an immediate buy in to the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, to the extent, that he is now the co-ordinator of the Shot at Dawn Wales group, is a media contact/spokesperson for the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, was a central part of a BBC Northern Ireland documentary on the Irish Shot at Dawn in 2005, despite communicating our concerns about Mr McGeehan to the programme maker and to others in the UK, has been interviewed extensively by the world’s media quoting ad nauseam his uncorroborated relationship to Private McGeehan, has been given unlimited access to the upper echelons of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign and via the back door the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign, to the detriment of our Irish support base, and interestingly is cited as being a second cousin of Private McGeehan in the book Forgotten Soldiers Published October 2007 by BBC Northern Ireland journalist Stephen Walker, sourced from Mr McGeehan himself, again we communicated our concerns about Mr McGeehan to the author prior to publication We reiterate, so far, no bona fide relationship has been established whatsoever by Mr John McGeehan to Private Bernard McGeehan.

Those in the UK and in particular Mr Julian Putkowski who initially vouched for Mr McGeehan should also be asked as to why Mr McGeehan's uncorroborated claim of relationship to Private McGeehan was accepted so easily by the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign without firstly confirming his actual status? All our other Irish relatives have proven to our satisfaction their relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn. Is Mr McGeehan to be treated differently? We think not. Mr McGeehan's apparent inability to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate his claim of relationship as a second cousin or whatever of Private Bernard McGeehan is a matter of great concern for the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl. Taking into account the above we believe the airing of this matter publicly on this website is more than justified.

For the record, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl is not linked with any UK grouping styling itself as the Shot at Dawn Campaign, Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, Shot at Dawn Wales or Wales Shot at Dawn and any such attempted linkage by others in the UK is erroneous.

Over a period of years and particularly since November 2007, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl has through various channels of communication advised Mr John McGeehan that he is required to produce the necessary documentary evidence (as our other Irish families have done) to support his claim of relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan. Consequently, as Mr McGeehan has failed thus far, to produce any verification of relationship, we are now confirmed in the opinion, that Mr McGeehan is not, and never was a second cousin, or a relative of Private Bernard McGeehan, and that all such uncorroborated claims by him, amount to an outrageous deception, to the detriment of our Irish families and support base. Mr McGeehan's inability to corroborate his relationship to any of our Irish Shot at Dawn is of great concern. It is also of great concern that an organisation such as the Pardons Campaign in the UK which prides itself on high moral standards and the integrity of its sources and members, should support and permit Mr McGeehan such latitude. In the light of the above, are the criticisms by Colonel John Hughes-Wilson and other opponents of the Pardons Campaign in the British military and political establishment now vindicated, when they point to some hidden agenda behind the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign effort ?

If there was existing irrefutable documentary evidence of a bona fide relationship to Private McGeehan, it is our belief that such evidence would have been produced by Mr McGeehan a long time ago. To date, no cogent rebuttal has ever been presented directly to the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl by Mr John McGeehan in response to the above. Consequently, all claims and assertions by Mr John McGeehan of a bona fide relationship to Private McGeehan in the absence of documentary evidence should be treated as bogus until proven otherwise.

Postscript 1

Saturday 14^th March 2009: A person claiming to be a relative made contact with the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl and presented documentary evidence proving his direct relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan. This relative had no problem corroborating his relationship to Private McGeehan and we are satisfied from our own genealogical sources, that he is a bona fide relative of Private McGeehan. To date, all our bona fide relatives have presented documentary evidence confirming their relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn, except Mr John McGeehan of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign.

Please note, there is a moral imperative on those who claim relationship to any of our Irish Shot at Dawn to prove through documentary evidence their bona fides. The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl (to protect the integrity of the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign effort against spurious claimants), cannot and will not accept such claims of relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn without the appropriate documentation being produced.

Unknown to the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) until the 1^st November 2007, an article entitled Payouts Hope For Ex-Seamen had been published in the Newcastle Journal on January 12^th 2002 which asserted inter alia, referring to a Mr John Hipkin, that:

1. Hundreds of former merchant seamen could be compensated over being forced to work for the Nazis thanks to a North-East war veteran.

2. His evidence over how captured seamen were mistreated has led to a campaign to extend the deadline on a compensation fund set up by the German government.

This is misleading and untrue. Although the article goes on to elaborate on our involvement, it does misleadingly give the impression that Mr Hipkin is somehow responsible for any compensation that might have been procured for former merchant seamen held captive by the Germans and forced to do slave labour and that contact was initiated by ourselves, which is also untrue. Mr Hipkin contacted us in the first instance in May 2001 as a result of our article in the UK edition of the Irish Post. He did give information regarding the fact that he had seen Irish born merchant seamen as prisoners in the merchant navy internment camp, known as Milag Nord in Germany during world war two, and we are grateful for that information. However, the claim or suggestion that his evidence is responsible in some way for our decision to lead a campaign to extend the deadline on a compensation fund set up by the German government, is blatantly untrue. After extensive consultation with other authorities in Ireland, the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) initiated its own research project which was ultimately successful in achieving large compensation for Irish born, British and allied merchant seamen who were captured during world war two while serving on British or allied vessels and forced to work as slave labourers in the Nazi Slave Labour Camp in Bremen-Farge. This research project is still ongoing.

The Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) which also coordinates the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl, vigorously rejects this unfortunate assertion by the Newcastle Journal. We wish to point out that Mr John Hipkin also leads the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign.

• A special word of thanks to the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and to the Military Archives-Irish Defence Forces whose assistance and support was crucial in this endeavour. Without the Irish authorities cooperation, the German compensation fund deadline would not have been extended and neither would it have been possible to procure the contemporary information which was essential to corroborate any claim for compensation on behalf of British, Irish or allied merchant seamen who were forced to work as slave labourers by the Gestapo during world war two. The Irish input instigated a precedent.

• On the 11^th November 2006, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl coordinated by the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) acknowledged the Newcastle Journal for their exemplary support on the pardons issue. See Award For Campaigning Journalist.

Note for Journalists BBC Northern Ireland:

Regarding the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl effort. Notwithstanding the immense debt of gratitude owed to the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin and in particular to the Civil Servants in Iveagh House Anglo-Irish Division, a great debt of gratitude is also owed to the NUJ/SIPTU and their members for the critical role they played in the success of the whole Shot at Dawn Campaign effort, Irish and UK. Without the attendant publicity of sympathetic and constructive written analysis it would have been extremely difficult to pursue the British Government down the line and exert the appropriate pressure. One could point to Irish North and South, UK, USA, Canadian, Australian and New Zealand newspapers in particular.  Thank you folks. The collective efforts of all concerned deserve a collective credit and you will not be forgotten by the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl or our Irish families some of whom must still remain anonymous at their request. That said, one has had very bad experiences with some radio and television journalists, in particular from the BBC in Northern Ireland.  Following  a previous unpleasant experience with a journalist from BBC Radio Ulster/Radio Foyle we indicated our concerns on the website of the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) see BBC Radio (Northern Ireland) programme entitled 'A Journey to Remember'.

• In the light of the above, under no circumstance should any journalist from the BBC in Northern Ireland Radio or Television etc, consider making contact again. Indeed until Mr McGeehan formally corroborates his relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan through documentary evidence, his inclusion by any media outlet in any programme or article etc, as a commentator, representative or other, will immediately disbar the involvement of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl.

• As a policy we do not give out the contact details of our families. However, depending on source and relevance, an enquiry is usually passed on and  then left up to the relatives concerned to initiate contact, at their discretion.  Peter Mulvany B.C.L (Hon)., HDip Arts Admin,  Chairperson Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46), Co-ordinator Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl.

Previous