Enoch Burke Tells Court Article About Him Was A 'Wholly Malicious Hit Job'
Jailed teacher Enoch Burke has described an allegedly defamatory article as ‘a wholly malicious hit job’.
He has sued over an article on October 9, 2022, which alleged he had annoyed other prisoners in Mountjoy with his religious beliefs, and had to move cells for his own safety.
Mr Burke was in prison for failing to obey a court order to stay away from Wilsons Hospital School in Westmeath, where he had taught before being suspended following his reaction to being asked to call a student by a new name and the pronoun ‘they’.
Jailed teacher Enoch Burke has described an allegedly defamatory article as ‘a wholly malicious hit job’. Pic: Collins Courts
His case has been taken against Mediahuis Ireland Ltd, the publisher of the newspaper, as well as reporter Ali Bracken and editor Alan English.
In his closing submissions, Enoch Burke said the defendants had not fulfilled the criteria for the defence they had pleaded of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest.
‘This was a grave and serious libel. It defamed me. My reputation was taken from me, my good reputation that I had,’ he said.
‘It was a wholly malicious hit job on me, portraying me as an unbearable person who relentlessly repeats his religious beliefs to the extent that people are not able to bear it and may resort to physical violence.’
He has sued over an article on October 9, 2022, which alleged he had annoyed other prisoners in Mountjoy with his religious beliefs, and had to move cells for his own safety. Pic: Collins Courts
He said he should be entitled to aggravated damages, due to the way the defendant witnesses had persisted in their opinion that he could have annoyed prisoners, and referred to their admitted error about his moving cell as a ‘minor mistake’.
However, Ronan Lupton SC, for Mediahuis, said the ‘elephant in the room’ was that Mr Burke was imprisoned for failing to abide by court rules – and now sought to make the court order another party to do something, in order to vindicate his name.
Judge Rory Mulcahy observed that day four of the trial was too late to argue that the case should not be heard due to Mr Burke’s status as a contemnor.
Mr Lupton went on to argue that the case brought by Mr Burke was ‘strained, false and hollow’.
Mr Burke had not shown evidence that the article had lowered him in the eyes of society, or caused him to be shunned, other than to show comments on social media – which Mr Lupton said were not admissible.
He said Mr Burke had become a subject of public interest, due to his engagement with the justice system.
Mr Burke was in prison for failing to obey a court order to stay away from Wilsons Hospital School in Westmeath, where he had taught before being suspended following his reaction to being asked to call a student by a new name and the pronoun ‘they’. Picture: Collins Courts
He said there was no malice in the publication, and that it was not defamatory to say that someone was annoying.
‘We maintain the position that the article is not defamatory,’ he said.
However, if the court did find that defamation had taken place, he argued that ‘we are into nominal damages territory’.
He said the article online only raised €750 in commercial revenue, and had been taken down very quickly, and an apology published.
Judge Rory Mulcahy noted: ‘What is striking about the newspaper’s position is that it did not matter if it [the story] was true or not.
‘Its position after the inaccuracy [was identified] was exactly the same as before.’
Earlier, journalist Ali Bracken described the article as ‘innocuous’ and said she had faith in her confidential source, who turned out to have given her incorrect information.
Ms Bracken told the court: ‘When somebody who has a public profile is now in jail it is a normal journalistic thing for me and many other people to try to find out how they are getting on. That was the context.
‘If my prison source came to me and said Enoch Burke is running a bible study class and there’s a waiting list of people who want to attend, I would have happily reported what I was told.
‘I accepted what I was told, and verified what I was told.’
Ms Bracken said there was a huge public interest in transgender ideology, and that Mr Burke had become a national talking point as it was unprecedented for a teacher to be sent to prison in such circumstances.
Ms Bracken said she had checked the information she had been given with another unnamed source.
She said she had also contacted the Irish Prison Service press office to put the content of the article to them. The press office did not respond, she said.
She learned of the complaint from the Burkes on the day after the article was published.
‘I obviously went back to my source. Unfortunately, which is a matter of regret to me, we had said that you were moved to general population and back. That was inaccurate and that is what we apologised for. I am a journalist, I strive to always be correct,’ she said.
‘We were incorrect, but as far as I am concerned it was a minor matter of fact as to where he was moved within the prison.
‘It was a surprise to me that my source was wrong. When I was informed of that I conveyed it to my editors.’
She continued: ‘It wasn’t a significant story. It was a short story. I was given information, I verified it, and contact was made with the prison service.
‘This was a somewhat innocuous article.’
During her cross examination by Enoch Burke, who is representing himself, she said she had not texted Mr Burke’s mother, or contacted any other member of the family, because she did not believe they would be able to comment on his behaviour within the prison.
‘It would have been fruitless, as far as I was concerned,’ she said.
She could not contact Mr Burke as he was in prison, she added.
Mr Burke said: ‘If you had contacted the family you would have been informed of the correct position, and the article would never have seen the light of day.’
In response to further questioning, she said she did not think it was a serious allegation to say that Mr Burke was annoying other prisoners.
Asked if she accepted it was not true that he was moved because he was at risk of a ‘beating’, she said she accepted that the prison service has since confirmed he was only moved to a different cell on the same landing for operational reasons.
‘I put it to you that you were reckless and malicious…the story was a bag of lies,’ Mr Burke said.
‘Absolutely not,’ she replied.
The judge said he would deliver his judgment in due course.
