The hearing of the case taken by Wilson’s Hospital School against its former employee Enoch Burke got underway at the High Court this morning.
The case is being heard before Judge Alexander Ownes and is scheduled to be heard over the next four days.
Earlier this month Burke, who used to teach English and German at the private school in Westmeath, lost his appeal against court orders for him to stay away from the school.
Despite being suspended and later dismissed Burke has continued to attend at the school and had been ordered to pay €24,000 in fines related to his continued presence by the 23rd of March. It is not clear whether or not the fine has been paid.
Proceedings began with Burke making a preliminary application alleging that documents supplied as part of a disclosure order had been improperly redacted.
Burke alleges that minutes of a board meeting held in relation to his suspension from the school were not supplied to him. He says that transcripts of a Whatsapp conversation were provided in the form of a typed letter depriving him of knowledge as to whether or files were included in the conversations.
He said that he discovered this to his “horror” within the court documents.
Justice Alexander Owens refused Burke’s application saying that relevant matters in relation to the documents could be dealt with in the course of proceedings.
The judge was unconvinced that there was substantial evidence to support Burke’s claims later calling them “flimsy” in nature.
Burke refused to accept this and insisted that he would be unable to proceed if the matters were not dealt with before the case got underway.
Burke also alleged that documents were inserted into files lodged in the court and that the documents had been “tampered” with.
Heated exchanges began to take place as counsel for Wilson’s Hospital School began to make their case.
Burke continued to address the court insisting that the case could not go ahead unless the issues he raised were dealt with first.
Heated verbal exchanges were made as the judge pleaded with Burke to take his seat while he repeatedly invited counsel for the school to open their case.
Burke said he became aware of “tampering” with the court documents at around 3pm yesterday while he was preparing to appear before the court this morning.
Judge Owens told Burke that he could not “go behind” his own ruling and that the matter was already decided upon.
Burke continued to address the court insisting that the judge deal with the matters brought forth immediately.
Burke said that two pages within the documents had been condensed into one and referred to a number of instances including where a black line had been used to redact information.
Counsel for Wilson’s Hospital said that if redactions had been made it was likely due to the information therein being of no relevance to the case.
Burke refused to accept this saying that full disclosure should be made in order to allow decisions to be made as to relevance.
“You don’t cover a white space with a black redaction” he said, insisting the documents had been “tampered” with.
Amid the ongoing exchanges Justice Owens said “I am the judge Mr. Burke, not you” as Burke continued to insist that the tampering he alleges was done deliberately and that certain sections had been “surreptitiously erased”.
Judge Owens reminded Mr. Burke that matters were required to proceed “with discipline” and that he was making serious allegations and that the court would not ‘jump to conclusions’ in that regard.
The judge said he would not draw any conclusions until he had heard from the other side and that he saw there was a discrepancy in appearance between the relevant pages of the disputed documents.
He said he understood the point Mr. Burke was attempting to make but emphasised that he had to hear from the other side saying that matter had to be dealt with “in an orderly fashion”.
As Burke continued to argue that the documents before the courts had been tampered with, the judge said that there was a possibility in matters of this nature that different printers could produce different results.
Burke said that it sounded like the judge was saying that the printer acted by itself.
During the hearing the judge became visibly agitated putting his head in his hands on more than one occasion.
Burke alleged that the documents had been “tampered” with in order to mislead the court and continued to insist that he be furnished with screen shots of a conversation which took place on Whatsapp between the former principal of the school Ms. Niamh, McShane and the chair Mr. John Rogers.
Burke believes that communications in relation to his suspension were made in an inappropriate manner by McShane and Rogers.
He said he believes that a report about him had been handed over ‘well before the 15th of August’ which is the date of submission mentioned in the documents.
Counsel for the school that no board meetings or discussions of documents had taken place before the 15th of August – the official submission date.
Burke replied saying that this was “an out and out lie”.
Emotion could be heard in Burke’s voice as he stated loudly that he had “spent three and a half months in prison” in relation to the proceedings.
Burke was urged by the judge to ‘keep an even temperature’ who insisted that he would not be cajoled by litigants or solicitors and barristers representing them after he took exception to Burke asking him to ‘come on now’.
Burke continued to address the court in raised tones insisting that solicitors and barristers had deliberately withheld minutes of a board meeting which he believes are vital to his case.
He said that if the case were allowed to proceed without these it would amount to a ‘lead weight’ being placed around his neck.
Burke says that a draft document was sent to the chairman of the board but that he was not furnished with this as part of his discovery of documents.
He addressed the judge saying “What are you going to do about this?” – continuing to insist that an order be made compelling counsel for the school to provide him with full records with information that he believes has been redacted.
Burke was cautioned by the judge that he was making serious allegations and that he must allow the other side to respond to those allegations as he continued to speak over the school’s counsel.
Counsel for the school said they categorically rejected Burke’s allegations “in the strongest terms”.
Judge Owens said that there was an element of haranguing to Burke’s continuous interruptions saying ‘Lord almighty, what am I going to do with you’, and that Burke’s conduct would “test the patience of Job”.
Judge Owens said that it appeared that he was “ineffective” on the case as Burke seemed to “not take a blind bit of notice” of his directions.
These exchanges lasted for the better part of two hours with counsel for the school saying that they had no confidence that they would be allowed to make their arguments under the present circumstances.
Burke continued to insist that the matter could not proceed unless his concerns were addressed.
Judge Owens delivered several warnings advising Burke that he was in contempt of court saying that “in the old days” he would have directed the Gardaí in attendance to remove him to Mountjoy prison.
The judge lamented what he referred to as recent moves by the courts which he said put limitations on his ability to do so.
He said that he would not allow a “digital strip search” of communications that may be private, saying again that any redactions may have been done in relation to lack of relevance.
After Burke continued to protest, the visibly frustrated judge said ‘Is there some problem with your ears?’ telling Burke that further protests would ‘not be entertained’.
Burke continued to pursue the matter of redaction leading the judge to exclaim “Mr Burke please, if there’s a question in relation to redaction it can be dealt with during the trial”.
As Burke continued to make arguments before the court the judge repeatedly asked him if he was finished.
He pleaded with Burke to “please sit down” saying again that he would not “go behind” decisions already made.
The judge repeatedly asked Burke to resume his seat while admonishing him for his conduct and telling him he had been in contempt of court for ‘about an hour and a half’ at that stage.
As the situation in the court continued to deteriorate laugher engulfed those in attendance including members of the legal profession and journalists.
Burke and his family were visibly upset at the laughter and said that it “was no laughing matter” with Enoch calling the court a “circus with spectators” which led the judge to retort saying that if it was a circus Burke had made it so.
Justice Owens advised Burke that unless he agreed to abide by the proper procedures of the court, his only two options would be to view the proceedings from a remote location or not attend at all.
Burked was warned that the case would be heard in his absence if he chose to leave the court and that if he were to view the proceedings remotely he would be unable to cross examine witnesses.
Amid continued arguments from Mr. Burke, Justice Owens asked that somebody ‘please turn his microphone off’, and he directed counsel for Wilson’s Hospital to make their arguments while talking over Burke who interrupted multiple times.
Burke addressed the Judge saying: “I am begging you to do justice in this preliminary matter”.
The judge told Burke that he had every intention of giving him a fair hearing but that he must abide by court procedure and asked him if he was prepared to respect the rulings of the court.
As Burke continued to ask for clarification in relation to the material which he alleges was “tampered with” the judge set the matter back for two o’clock ruling that Burke not be allowed to attend the court.
Gript attempted to approach Enoch Burke asking if he would speak to us in relation to the ongoing saga between himself and his former employer, however our invitation was declined.