Ex-IRA bomber Marian Price sues Disney over Jean McConville murder scene in ‘Say Nothing'
Former IRA bomber Marian Price is suing Disney over a scene in the drama series Say Nothing, which she claims 'falsely portrays her as having carried out the execution-style murder of Jean McConville by shooting her in the back of the head'.
Price (71), who is suing under her married name McGlinchey, is seeking damages, including aggravated and punitive damages, for defamation against Disney over its Disney+ show, according to the plenary summons lodged in the High Court in Dublin.
Punitive damages are awarded in defamation cases where a defendant has engaged in malicious, outrageous or vindictive conduct.
Price is seeking an injunction restraining the defendants from further publishing the same or similar allegations about her. She also wants an order 'for the immediate removal of the relevant scene of Episode 9, depicting the alleged murder'.
The case was lodged by Price's solicitors, Phoenix Law, on July 2.
Since then, Dentons — the UK firm that recently represented the BBC in its unsuccessful defence of a defamation action by Gerry Adams in Dublin — has come on record to represent Disney and Minim UK Productions, a co-defendant in the case.
While the Disney+ series is based on the 2018 book by Patrick Radden Keefe of the same name, the book did not provoke legal action from Price.
Price's lawyers have said that while Keefe's book was suggestive in claiming she may have shot Ms McConville, the dramatisation was explicit in portraying that this happened.
Price was jailed for her part in a bombing campaign in London in 1973 before being released in 1980. She was later a vocal critic of the Good Friday Agreement.
The series depicts her sister, Dolours Price, as one of three IRA volunteers who have one gun available to kill Ms McConville. The kidnapped woman is shown on her knees while desperately reciting the names of her 10 children.
Dolours Price is shown deliberately shooting wide of Ms McConville, before her sister takes the gun and completes the killing with one shot.
Marian Price is seeking damages for defamation
The 'disappearance' of the mother of 10 from her home in the Divis Flats in Belfast in 1972 is one of the IRA's most notorious crimes. Her body was only recovered in 2003, from a beach in Co Louth.
Radden Keefe's book is partly based on the Belfast Project at Boston College, which involved former paramilitaries speaking about their experiences of the Troubles.
Among those who taped interviews that were to be released only after their deaths were former IRA volunteers Dolours Price and Brendan 'The Dark' Hughes.
Both claimed that former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams had authorised Ms McConville's disappearance, something Adams denied.
Tom Vaughan-Lawlor plays the older version of Brendan 'The Dark' Hughes
The Price sisters are central characters in Radden Keefe's book and the Disney adaptation, in which they are played by Lola Petticrew (Dolours) and Hazel Doupe (Marian) in their younger years.
Maxine Peake plays the older Dolours up to her death in 2013, and Helen Behan plays the older Marian. Tom Vaughan-Lawlor plays the older version of Brendan Hughes.
Dolours Price is depicted as being disgusted at witnessing Gerry Adams carrying Hughes's coffin after his death in 2008.
At the end of every episode of the Disney+ series, text is shown saying that Adams has always denied being a member of the IRA or participating in IRA violence.
After the final episode, the text says Adams denies any involvement in the murder of Ms McConville. It also says Marian Price denies any involvement in the murder of Ms McConville.
Hazel Doupe as Marian and Lola Petticrew as Dolours Price in 'Say Nothing' on Disney+
In 2014, Marian Price pleaded guilty to providing a mobile phone that was used by the Real IRA in 2009 to claim the attack in which British soldiers Patrick Azimkar and Mark Quinsey were killed outside Massereene Barracks in Co Antrim.
She has always strongly denied any involvement in the murder of Ms McConville since Radden Keefe's book was published.
Speaking to the Sunday World before the Disney+ series was made, the US author and journalist said he stood over his reporting.
'I wouldn't have published Marian's name and suggested that she murdered Jean McConville if I had even one per cent doubt that it was true,' he said.
Radden Keefe is credited as an executive producer on the Disney+ show.
I stand by my reporting. I'm quite transparent about my process of deduction
'It would be unconscionable to make such an accusation if I was not completely certain. But I was certain,' he told reporters.
'She has denied it, though I would note that it took her five months, from when I initially approached her solicitor for comment back in May, to do so.
'I stand by my reporting. I'm quite transparent about my process of deduction in the book, so readers can decide for themselves whether they are persuaded.'
Peter Corrigan, one of Price's solicitors, told the Sunday World last year that the TV show was less ambiguous than the book about the central allegation about his client.
'Who is his source on this claim?' he asked. 'The book is one thing — it's more ambiguous — but the Disney show is categoric about Marian murdering Jean McConville.'
Today's News in 90 Seconds - July 28th
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
On call with the Dublin Fire Brigade
Nikita Hand speaks to the media at the High Court after Conor McGregor loses his appeal over the verdict in the civil rape case. Video: Stephen Conneely
Irish Independent
9 hours ago
- Irish Independent
The gripping, true story of William Adams, whose life inspired the blockbuster ‘Shogun'
History Disney's adaptation of the James Clavell novel Shogun was brilliantly meditative and gripping, thanks to the series placing ancient Japan and its revered culture at the heart of the story, rather than the usual white, wiser-than-thou saviour trope viewers have endured down the years in western interpretations of the country. Historical authenticity coupled with a big budget made it one of the most intelligent and captivating works of television in recent years, with much credit going to Frederik Cryns, historical adviser on the production.
Irish Daily Mirror
10 hours ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Debunked: Conor McGregor makes series of misleading claims in court rant
Conor McGregor has made a number of misleading claims - after losing his appeal of a civil finding that he raped Nikita Hand. In a lengthy and rambling post on social media platform X, McGregor sensationally stated that he has no intention of paying the legal fees of James Lawrence - who the High court previously heard he referred to his solicitors and admitted paying his bills. In his post McGregor referred to the November High Court case which he lost and the appeal case which he also lost as a 'shake down,' and insisted he didn't say he was paying Lawrence's fees. 'You are out of your f*cking mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs, folks. Who said I was paying his fees?'I said I didn't know if I was, when the accusers barrister asked me on the stand, as I didn't. (who is paying his own fees I should have asked him at that time) ???' he posted. However in the High Court case itself McGregor was pressed by trial Judge Alexander Owens if he was paying Lawrence's fees or not. In response to cross examination first from Ms Hand's Counsel McGregor stated that he 'possibly' paid James Lawrence legal fees and referred him to them. 'I'm not 100 per cent. I get staggering legal bills.' The Irish Mirror's Crime Writers Michael O'Toole and Paul Healy are writing a new weekly newsletter called Crime Ireland. Click here to sign up and get it delivered to your inbox every week Judge Owens then stated to McGregor that it was a simple question - did he pay Lawrence's bills or not. McGregor responded by saying: 'I believe I did.' In refusing Lawrence costs at the conclusion of the High Court case in November, Judge Owens said both men were acting in "lockstep" in their defence of the action and it would be inappropriate to award costs to Mr Lawrence even though the jury found he did not rape Ms Hand. The Court of Appeal this week refused to allow Lawrence to be paid his costs as they too found that the money would ultimately end up going to McGregor, who was paying his fees. Nikita Hand speaking to the media after attending the Court of Appeal (Image: Collins Photos) McGregor goes on to claim in his new post that he was 'on the stand in a world of fog being accused of a crime I didn't commit, and that I was actually cleared of criminally and exonerated by every witness present, as well as believed twice over by the public prosecutor, but still up on a stand civilly, in absolute shock.' This statement is also misleading - as McGregor was not in fact 'cleared' or 'exonerated.' Gardai did investigate the alleged rape and sent a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). However the DPP decided not to take the case and therefore no criminal charges were levelled against the UFC fighter. This by itself does not mean McGregor was 'cleared' or 'exonerated' of the claims - just that he was not charged or convicted of any criminal offence. However the finding by the civil jury in November that he was liable for assault - whereby the assault in question was the rape that occurred in the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford in 2018, means the fighter can hardly claim he was 'exonerated.' The finding of the jury has also now been upheld by the three Judges of the Court of Appeal. McGregor goes on to make claims about why the criminal case did not go ahead - stating that there was plenty of evidence of CCTV footage which he claimed showed Ms Hand 'partying away, messaging away' and leaving and coming back to the hotel 'not a f*cking laughing, dancing, kissing, biting, play fighting. It's some watch. I was home HOURS and this is all going on,' he wrote. All of the footage was played in full and repeatedly re shown to the jury in the civil trial - with them ultimately siding with Ms Hand who stated she was drunk and not in the right state of mind at the time of the footage. Having been shown this footage and heard arguments from both sides they nonetheless sided with her, that she had been raped in the room by McGregor. McGregor goes on to attack Ms Hand in his post by saying: 'How people sleep at night is beyond me. I'm sure they don't. Not soundly anyway, no way. Impossible. To falsely accuse someone of rape and lose, then attempt to ignore that fact/brush it under the rug is truly heinous on another level!' However Ms Hand did not lose her case - she in fact won it, and had it re affirmed this week by three learned Judges of the Court of Appeal. Mr McGregor can continue to claim he did not rape Ms Hand - and it is a fact that he is not convicted of the criminal offence. He has however been found to have raped Ms Hand and is liable for it, by a civil jury. He now claims he 'welcomes' the new case taken by Ms Hand against him and the suddenly withdrawn proposed witnesses, couple Samantha O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins. Ms Hand is suing McGregor, Ms O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins for damages for 'malicious abuse of the process of the court.' It comes after McGregor's own Counsel announced at the opening of the appeal earlier this month that they would not be called as witnesses - after admitting that the evidence was not sustainable. Now in his new post McGregor is trying to claim that the evidence of Ms O'Reilly and Mr Cummins ought to have been heard - despite his own legal team arguing it shouldn't. 'I believed their claim, as portions of it was verified through the response affidavit to it,' he claimed. 'Why these two witnesses were not called, i will never know. It was on the very morning of. They were present and very eager to testify,' he claimed. 'It seemed they were pulled out of fear from my appointed team tbh. For what I don't know. These people said they seen something, let us all hear. If it's legit, great, it sounds very legit to me. If it's not, it's on them.' After the evidence was suddenly withdrawn the Judges of the Court of Appeal made the decision to refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), after reading submissions from Ms Hand's legal team about the couple. Ms Hand's Counsel flagged concerns that potential perjury had been committed by the couple - and subornation of perjury by Conor McGregor himself for attempting to introduce the now withdrawn 'evidence.' He now claims he is 'happy this is still ongoing' - despite now being liable for a staggering €2M legal bill he has to pay Nikita Hand - and the remainder of the €250,000 award. Sign up to the Irish Mirror's Courts and Crime newsletter here and get breaking crime updates and news from the courts direct to your inbox.
