Anthony McIntyre ðŸ”– As a lover of television crime drama, the lure of good police investigations is magnetic. 


Even without the screen, where they have all featured, Harry Hole, Carl Morck or Harry Bosch have come up so often in crime novels I have read, the ground is more than adequately covered. 

If asked to pick a favourite investigator, it would be Sarah Lund from The Killing, arguably the best crime drama ever made. The Scandinavians can do it like no others. The actress who played Inspector Lund in The Killing, Sofie GrÃ¥bøl, featured in a drama I just finished watching three days ago. This time, in Chestnut Man: Hide And Seek, she was not a detective but the mother of a murdered teenager. 

When, in the past year, I read Night Train by Martin Amis, and was accosted by the statement from Detective Mike Hoolihan, a woman, I Am Police, the thought occurred that the time had come to once again pick up literature outside the novel sphere and read the account of someone who can authentically say I am Police.

Pat Marry, whom I had the pleasure of meeting once, served in An Garda Siochana for thirty years, reaching the rank of Detective Inspector. His police career began at twenty five, eight years after his application to join the force was turned down because he was too young. The young man refused to give up, and forty years ago stepped out from Templemore Garda College and onto a path that would lead him to marry murder, in that he became wedded to solving some of Ireland's most brutal killings. Regular news watchers of a certain age profile will readily recall the high profile murders of Rachel O'Reilly and Adrian Donohue, both of which ended in convictions and life sentences for those found guilty.

Marry takes the reader on a well plotted course while emphasising that at the start of his own career there was no such thing as a well plotted course. Detectives simply had to learn on the job where 'the dead became a natural part of your world.' As a murder detective death by natural causes was not his speciality. Overcoming his natural misgivings about a close proximity to death was solved by 'spending a night with a corpse' and the 'loud farts' that the recently deceased emitted. The author has the knack of making death if not murder per se morbidly entertaining. 

The technical evolution of An Garda is revealed through successive investigations. More science-driven expertise became available, the heavy gang tactics being displaced by forensic scrutiny. Whereas the Heavy Gang adopted the motto of the Saigon police - if a suspect is innocent beat him until he is guilty - Marry had neither the need nor the inclination to apply the heavy hand. There would be few scandals flowing from the laser light touch of DNA.

The book covers crimes I no longer remember, if I ever knew about them to begin with. In December 1995 in Belfast, where I lived, the IRA was killing people it viewed as being inhabitants of the world of illicit drugs. So while the killings of  Christopher 'Syd' Johnston, Martin McCrory and Fra Collins made the daily news bulletins and updates, the rape-murder in Blanchardstown of Marilyn Rynn the same month may not have registered. Partition had succeeded in ways possibly not conceived of at its inception, placing ear plugs and eye masks along the border. 

Whether investigating Mary Gough's death or that of Rachel Callely, Marry enters into a friendship with the deceased, believing they hold the answers to their own murder. The logic, when narrated, induces a chill:

. . .  there is a particular silence at a murder scene, one you don't hear anywhere else in your life. It's the silence of goneness, of someone suddenly ripped out of the world when they didn't want to go.

They can't speak but Marry sets out to become the ventriloquist through whom they can detail to the world what caused their demise. A scientific eye might raise a quizzical brow thinking it is a style that places too much emphasis on the subjective. Yet there can be no quarrel with success which is frequently guided by the hunch that interacts with rather than behaves independently of the lab. 

Marry is not a firm's man and is unafraid to speak out about the culture and hierarchical deficiencies that in his view prevent the force from achieving better results. Like many bureaucracies, An Garda seems staffed by too many who fail to see what is in front of their noses because their position within the hierarchical structure depends on them not seeing. That failing prioritises loyalty over ability leading to an inhibition of initiative 

Pat Marry rings authentic in a way that his colleague on the force, Gerry O'Carroll, never did, either in his columns or media interviews. Brawn over brain, intimidation before intellect led to huge embarrassment for O'Carroll particularly in the Kerry Babies case. Nothing like that dogged Marry's career.  Despite my curiosity in the genre, I don't intend picking up O'Carroll's autobiography The Sheriff. Fiction presented as fiction is great. Fiction dressed up as fact - the sort of book that finds its true use value in stabilising an old settee that has lost a caster.

As for the literary output of Pat Marry, told matter of fact, bereft of self serving waffle, the average reader and criminology student will find plenty in these pages to prompt them to go for the remainder of Marry's books. Just don't expect to find them stamped 'Remainder.' 

Pat Marry, 2020, The Making Of A Detective. Penguin. ISBN: 978-0241985311

Follow on Bluesky

The Making Of A Detective

Zeteo UK Written by Owen Jones.

An attempted beheading in the street. Yet no incendiary front pages followed. No politicians issued statements inciting fury. There were no riots, no pogroms.

This was a terror-related attack by a white neo-Nazi, Alina Burns, against a Kurdish barber last year. Similarly, when two teenagers stabbed to death a random British Asian father as he delivered groceries to his mother in Wales, Nigel Farage did not demand “pure, cold rage.” When a white British man raped a Sikh woman, believing her to be Muslim, the Daily Telegraph did not ask if the UK had “descended into anarchy.”

And when a white man stabbed a Saudi student to death in Cambridge, GB News didn’t host a segment headlined, ‘British people are fed up!’ Indeed, there’s no evidence it covered this hideous murder at all.

Belfast burned this week. The direct culprits were racist thugs who set fire to homes they believed migrants lived in. Families with little children had to be rescued from the flames. Businesses and cars were burned. Vehicles were stopped so the mobs could search for migrants. We have a word for this: it is a pogrom.

None of this can be divorced from Northern Ireland’s own history. In the summer of 1969, loyalist thugs burned one in 20 Catholics out of their homes in Belfast – the biggest act of ethnic cleansing in Western Europe since World War II. Perhaps some of their grandchildren continued this hateful tradition.

Continue @ Zeteo UK.

But there is another context for this pogrom. For years, British media and political elites have portrayed Britain as descending into violent mayhem because of immigration.

That’s all based on a lie. There has unquestionably been a huge increase in immigration over the last two decades, and it has made Britain far more diverse than it was. Yet by any measure you pick, violence in Britain has plummeted over that same period. Overall surveyed crime is about a third of what it was in 2002. The murder rate in England and Wales is nearly half what it was in 2003. In London – the UK’s most diverse city – it is at its lowest ever recorded level. Hospital admissions caused by assault, knife assault, bodily force, blunt objects and firearms have all fallen sharply.

Detailed research by the Oxford Migrant Observatory finds no significant relationship between immigrants and crimes. Foreign nationals are underrepresented when it comes to violent offences and robbery.

The Belfast Riots Are An Anti-Migrant Pogrom 🪶 And The British Media Has Serious Questions To Answer

Ukraine Solidarity Group ✊ A Digest of News from Ukrainian Sources ⚔ 8-June-2026.

In this week’s bulletin

⬤ More evidence of Russian torture.
⬤ Russian “Double-Tap” Strikes.
Discontent with Putin.
⬤ Russian socialists’ solidarity with Ukraine.
⬤  Comment: Andriy Melnik.
⬤ Ukrainian Children’s Rights Violated.
⬤ Russia Persecutes Crimea Media.
Interview: Ukrainian on Sumud Flotilla.
⬤ Russia’s unlawful deportations

News from the territories occupied by Russia

Journalist’s Day: How Russia Persecutes Media in Occupied Crimea (Crimea Platform, June 6th)

Faces of Resistance: Artem Herasymov, a Political Prisoner from Crimea (Crimea Platform, June 5th)

12-year sentence over abduction and savage torture of slain Euromaidan activist Yury Verbytsky (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 5th)

Five Ukrainians tortured for ‘confessions’ because the FSB couldn’t catch the partisans who killed a Russian-installed traitor (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 4th)

Unholy order: Russia building system of religious control in occupied Ukraine (The Insider, June 3rd)

Violations of Ukrainian Children’s Rights in the Context of War: A Publication by ADC Memorial Brussels and KHPG (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 3rd)

Russia imprisons Crimean political prisoner 2,200 kilometres from her infant daughters (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 3rd)

Weekly update on the situation in occupied Crimea (Crimea Platform, June 2nd)

61-year-old Ukrainian tells Russian court how he was forced to listen, while bound to a chair, as his wife was tortured (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 2nd)

New propaganda film on how Russia ‘protects’ the Ukrainian children whose lives it destroyed (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 1st)

Widow of Mariupol defender sentenced by Russian occupation ‘court’ to 14 years for ‘spying’ (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 1st)

ZMINA took part in a meeting with UNESCO and human rights defenders on growing repression against journalists in occupied Crimea (Zmina, May 28th)

News from the front

Russian advance stalls, Ukraine holds Kramatorsk (Meduza, 6 June)

An Italian veteran of the Kurdish resistance fell defending Ukraine (Facebook, May 29th)

News from Ukraine

Cedos Studies Gender Equality and Inclusion in Ukrainian Schools (Cedos, June 4th)

Ukrainian ombudsman reports on the State of Human Rights in 2025 (Zmina, June 4th)

How to build an effective social protection system: Cedos and UNICEF in Ukraine held an expert workshop (Cedos, June 2nd)

Senior Care in Wartime Ukraine: A Fragmented Continuum of Arrangements Inside an “Unpromising Sector” (Social Inclusion, 2026)

War-related news from Russia

Gini and his master: How Russia manipulates statistics to conceal inequality (The Insider, June 5th)

‘We won’t give up’: OVD-info responds to “foreign agent” status (Meduza, 5 June)

Economic forum underway, drone strikes on St Petersburg (Meduza, 4 June)

“You are not Russian any more”: daughter of Putin lieutenant convicted for supporting Ukraine (Mediazona, 4 June)

Fake foreigners, fugitive criminals, and Holocaust deniers: Who ended up in Moscow’s “international tribunal on crimes of Ukrainian Nazis” (The Insider, June 4th)

Three causes of Russia’s demographic crisis (Posle Media, 3 June)

War, economic crisis, and discontent in Putin’s Russia (Tempest, June 1st)

Inside Russia’s system of torture – YouTube Documentary (Kyiv Independent, 2026)

Analysis and comment

High time to think differently about Ukrainian nationalist leader Andriy Melnik (John-Paul Himka / Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, 3 June)

Russian socialists: “Solidarity means accepting Ukrainians’ pain and suffering as our own” (People and Nature, June 3rd)

Interview with Andriy Movchan, who sailed to Gaza with the Global Sumud Flotilla (Transnational Institute of Social Ecology, May 27th)

Combatants, Mercenaries or Human Trafficking Victims? (Intn’l Fed’n for Human Rights, April)

Research of human rights abuses

The Russians’ “Double-Tap” Strike Tactics (Tribunal for Putin, June 5th)

KHPG, Memorial & OVD.info added to ‘List of terrorists & extremists’ for reporting on repression in Russia and occupied Ukraine (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, June 5th)

Russia Unlawfully Deported Ukrainian Prisoners to Its Territory (Dignity, May 2026)

International solidarity

Help Ukraine’s children learn in safety: aid appeal (Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, 3 June)

Fundraising for combat medics (Solidarity Collectives)

   

■■■■■■■■■■■

Have you seen TRY ME FOR TREASON yet?

Free to watch and download on Youtube. Russian anti-war protesters’ speeches in court. More information at Try Me For Treason

YouTube

■■■■■■■■■■■■

  
🔴This bulletin is put together by labour movement activists in solidarity with Ukrainian resistance. More information at Ukraine Information Group.

We are also on twitter. Our aim is to circulate information in English that to the best of our knowledge is reliable. If you have something you think we should include, please send it to 2U022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.


We are now on Facebook and Substack! Please subscribe and tell friends. Better still, people can email us at 2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com, and we’ll send them the bulletin direct every Monday. The full-scale Russian assault on Ukraine is going into its third year: we’ll keep information and analysis coming, for as long as it takes.

The bulletin is also stored on line here.

To receive the bulletin regularly, send your email to:
2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.
To stop it, please reply with the word “STOP” in the subject field.

News From Ukraine 💣 Bulletin 199

Kyle Clarke ðŸŽ¤ of 9News catches a Christian pastor, who wants to be governor of Colorado,  lying through his teeth. 


Marx The Liar

Wired Written by David Gilbert.

A White Supremacist Youth Group Helped Orchestrate the Belfast Riots After Elon Musk and Tommy Robinson stoked anger over a horrific knife attack in Belfast, a youth group linked to a global neo-Nazi movement quietly orchestrated anti-immigrant riots. 

Within an hour after a horrific knife attack took place in Belfast on Monday night, far-right UK activist Tommy Robinson had shared a video of the incident on X, a post that racked up 6 million views.

Within hours Elon Musk, the owner of the platform, weighed in, agreeing with a post calling for “consequences” for politicians.

By Tuesday morning, supercharged by X, the video was everywhere, and groups on Facebook were organizing protests across Northern Ireland and the UK. Far-right figures in the US and UK continued to pour fuel on the fire online, framing the incident as part of a broader antiwhite agenda being perpetrated in Western countries.

By Tuesday evening, violent protests had broken out in Belfast, with masked rioters setting fire to vehicles, kicking in the doors of homes they believed housed immigrants, and setting those homes on fire.

Politicians were quick to criticize Musk and Robinson, who did not reply to requests for comment . . . 

Continue @ Wired.

A White Supremacist Youth Group Helped Orchestrate The Belfast Riots

Right Wing Watch ðŸ‘€ Intercessors for America, a network of pro-Trump prayer warriors that works closely with the White House . . . 


. . .  is celebrating the Trump administration’s refusal to acknowledge Pride Month—celebrated in the U.S. in June—and praising the State Department’s “hard shift away from promoting pride and ungodly sexuality,” which includes a ban on embassies displaying Pride flags.

In a Wednesday post, IFA suggest that people offer prayers of thanks for “leaders who are willing to stand for biblical truth” and to ask God to “help our leaders stand strong against the lies of the pride and LGBT agendas.”

We prayed for an end to the erosion of biblical truth under President Biden, and those prayers have been answered through President Trump,” says IFA. “Let’s continue to pray for truth and wisdom for our leaders, as well as for policies that uphold God’s design for individuals, families, and society.

IFA kicked off Pride Month on Monday by promoting a “prayer guide” that asks God to “expose the demonic agenda behind ‘Pride’ Month and the ever increasing push toward normalizing sexual perversion and transgender ideology.” It warns that LGBTQ-affirming Christians will face “eternal consequences” for “promoting what is detestable” to God.

Continue @ RWW.

Christian Nationalist Trump Allies Celebrate Administration Snub of ‘Demonic’ Pride Month

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Two Thousand And Two

 

Pastords @ 48

 

A Morning Thought @ 3175

Cam Ogie ✍ The attempted murder in North Belfast has understandably generated shock, anger and revulsion.

Such acts of violence deserve unequivocal condemnation regardless of who commits them or who the victim may be. However, the public reaction to the incident has also exposed uncomfortable questions about consistency, selective outrage and political convenience.

The issue is not whether violence in North Belfast should be condemned—it absolutely should. The issue is whether our moral standards are applied consistently. If the injury or death of innocent people is wrong, then it should be wrong regardless of nationality, religion, ethnicity or geography.

In the days preceding the attack, many of those Unionist/Loyalist voices now calling for unity and solidarity against violence had been participating in events and demonstrations at Scarva where support was expressed for Israel's military actions in Gaza. Following the North Belfast incident, some of these same political voices used extremely strong and condemnatory language to describe the attack and expressing outrage at what had occurred.

This response highlights a perceived inconsistency, pointing out that many of those expressing such outrage ignores the devastating humanitarian consequences of the conflict and the deaths of thousands of civilians in Gaza, including women and children. Whether one agrees with that criticism or not, there remains an obvious tension when individuals express profound outrage at violence close to home while appearing less concerned by suffering occurring elsewhere.

Adding further complexity to the public debate is the fact that authorities have stated that they have no evidence to treat the North Belfast incident as terrorism related. At the same time, local accounts have alleged that the individuals involved were known to one another and further claimed that the individuals were known locally as suffering from substance abuse - drug addicts. That both allegedly suffered from drug related psychosis and who had apparently fallen out over a dispute of ownership of drugs. It has also been noted that the area where the attack occurred is close to several designated temporary hostels, emergency accommodation sites and supported living complexes. While Kinnaird Avenue itself is general social housing, the broader North Belfast area directly surrounding it features a high concentration of specialised facilities designed to support individuals experiencing homelessness, substance addiction or complex social issues. While this fact alone proves nothing about the circumstances of the attack, it forms part of the wider context within which local speculation has developed. Nevertheless, if such accounts prove to be accurate, they would raise legitimate questions about the speed with which some commentators sought to frame the incident within wider political narratives before all of the facts were known.

The danger in such situations is that public discourse can become driven by emotion and assumption rather than evidence. When people immediately seek to fit events into pre-existing political arguments, there is a risk that the actual circumstances become secondary to the narrative people wish to promote.

Equally revealing is the way certain crimes capture public attention while others quickly disappear from public discussion. Violent attacks only become symbols when society chooses to make them symbols. Countless victims never become rallying points for political campaigns, media outrage or public demonstrations. This naturally raises questions about why some incidents dominate headlines while others fade into obscurity. For example, there was not the same level of public hysteria following the Manchester school stabbings, nor were there widespread demands for immigration checks, deportations or expulsions upon conviction. Whether one agrees with such demands in any particular case is beside the point; the contrast in public and political reactions raises legitimate questions about why similar acts of violence can generate such different responses.

It also raises uncomfortable questions about consistency. Had the circumstances been reversed, would the reaction have been the same? If the victim and perpetrator had been of different racial or ethnic backgrounds, would the same political figures, commentators and campaigners have responded with equal urgency and prominence? Would public debate have taken a different direction? Would figures such as Keir Starmer. Nigel Farage, or Gavin Robinson and others within Unionism, have devoted the same level of attention and condemnation to the incident? These questions cannot be answered with certainty, but their very existence reflects a wider concern that public outrage is not always applied consistently and may, at times, be influenced by the identities of those involved.

The North’s own history provides another uncomfortable comparison. During the Conflict, the actions of the Shankill Butchers remain among the most notorious examples of sectarian brutality. Their victims suffered horrific violence, torture and murder. Yet those crimes rarely feature in contemporary public discourse with the same intensity of outrage that accompanies modern incidents. While the passage of time undoubtedly plays a role, it remains legitimate to ask why some acts of violence become enduring symbols while others are gradually relegated to the background of public memory.

Likewise, many other serious crimes receive far less sustained public attention. Questions are often raised as to why some victims become the focus of widespread political and media discussion while others do not. The answer is rarely straightforward, but it is reasonable to ask whether factors such as political context, public sentiment and media framing influence the prominence given to particular incidents.

The danger of selective outrage is that it undermines credibility. When people condemn violence only when committed by their opponents, or only when the victims belong to a particular group, their outrage begins to look less like a defence of human dignity and more like political tribalism.

If society genuinely wishes to combat hatred, violence and division, then the standard must be universal. The victim's identity should not determine the strength of our condemnation. Nor should the perpetrator's political, religious or cultural background determine whether we speak out.

The challenge facing the North - as it has faced for generations—is not simply condemning violence when it shocks us. It is maintaining the same moral standard when doing so is uncomfortable, politically inconvenient or challenges our own assumptions. Anything less risks turning justice into a matter of preference rather than principle.

A mature society should be capable of condemning violence wherever it occurs, demanding facts before drawing conclusions, and applying the same moral standards to all people. Consistency, rather than convenience, is ultimately the true test of principle.

Cam Ogie is a Gaelic games enthusiast.

When Outrage Depends On Who Holds The Knife

Tadhg Hickey 📺 with a satirical takedown of the racist riots in Belfast.  

Recommended by Brendan Keane.

Tel Aviv Tommy & Belfast Race Riots

Michael Phillips ✍ I picked up Talking to Strangers by Malcolm Gladwell some time ago, partly because I like the author and partly because the title caught my attention. 

What I didn’t expect was how directly some of its case studies could be applied to Republicanism — especially to the leadership’s repeated inability, or refusal, to identify touts even when the evidence was staring them in the face.

That does not excuse the fact that certain touts were allowed to operate with apparent impunity, no matter what information came to light.

Gladwell explores why human beings are so poor at detecting lies. In one study, Professor Timothy Levine found that people could identify liars only 54% of the time. Those are decent odds if you fancy your luck on a horse, but hardly the sort of odds on which you’d re-mortgage your house. Other experiments, involving job interviews and orchestra auditions, showed evaluators made better decisions when they did not actually see the candidates.

Gladwell then turns to more striking examples: the CIA’s supposed crème de la crème being made to look like amateurs by internal moles. Top-secret departments were infiltrated for years despite rumours, suspicions and even lie-detector tests. The most embarrassing part is that these spies were not masterful James Bond figures, skilled in deception and cunning. They left trails of breadcrumbs that Hansel and Gretel would have been proud of.

The reason, according to Levine, lies in what he calls Truth Default Theory: human beings are inclined to believe others, even when confronted with signs of dishonesty. There is an evolutionary logic to this. Society cannot function if we treat every stranger as a potential liar. Without some basic level of trust, society would collapse into suspicion and chaos — wonder if this sounds familiar today.

The surprising part is that even when we understand deception in theory, we often hesitate to suspect those close to us. A truth bias overrides the doubts we might otherwise have. Consequently, those who raise suspicions early, therefore, take enormous risks: public humiliation, loss of employment, isolation, and in some cases even death. We still see this today when whistleblowers leak damaging information that society should, in theory, be grateful to know.

But there is one factor Gladwell touches on without, in my view, giving it enough weight: likeability.

A few years ago, one of my neighbours was finally exposed as a paedo after what felt like an eternity of being widely known as a pervert. Yet most people liked him, more or less, provided they ignored the strange, off-the-wall remarks he made regardless of who was present. The American and British spies discussed in Gladwell’s book were often oddballs too. But they were generally liked — until, years later, the truth became impossible to ignore.

And this brings me to the real reason for these thoughts.

I have written several times about the person I consider to be the Brits’ current top Republican tout. I often wondered what a chance encounter with him would feel like, especially after having known him personally for so many years. Then it happened.

What struck me most was the likeability factor. We often imagine touts as rats, monsters, people without conscience. But one reason some of them survive for so long is precisely because they are nice guys! They can be friendly, approachable, easy in company. They can talk like old school friends at a reunion and slip naturally into their surroundings.

That was exactly how my encounter felt, despite everything I know about him and the damage he has inflicted on all of us. No wonder so many Republicans had doubts over the years.

Yet, to return to Gladwell, even the best spies and informers leave breadcrumbs. What they often share is an inability to provide respectable answers for the inconsistencies, contradictions and strange quirks throughout their careers.

At first, that failure is on us. After that, it belongs to those who still refuse to act on the evidence — and especially to those who stand in their corners defending them, when we know that they already know.

Michael Phillips is a former republican prisoner.  Keep up with his work.

An Academic Theory Of Being A Good Tout

Merrion Press ðŸ”– has just published a new book by John Ware.



Neither Confirm Nor Deny
British Intelligence, Lawless Agent Running And The Suppression Of Truth 

John Ware


The State is assassinating people.’

These were the chilling words said to have been sent to Tony Blair in 1999 in a damning note bluntly summarising one of the consequences of Britain’s decades-long intelligence war in Northern Ireland. State forces had crossed a line, guided by a secret review from 1980 that quietly rewired Britain’s war, placing intelligence gathering above the law.

What followed was the creation of a vast, covert agent-running machine that penetrated loyalist and republican organisations to unprecedented depths. Supporters claim the policy saved lives, helping pave the way for the Good Friday Agreement. Critics argue it also licensed murder, subverted justice and corrupted policing beyond repair.

Full of new and important revelations, this meticulously researched book is the inside story of the decades-long struggle to expose that truth – an attritional battle between detectives and lawyers on one side, and a powerful ‘securocracy’ on the other that was determined to protect its secrets. Focusing on two of the most notorious agents, Brian Nelson and Freddie Scappaticci, it reveals how the State has doggedly fought to control the narrative, silence scrutiny and preserve its legacy.

Paperback • €19.99|£18.99 • 392 pages • 234mm x 153mm • 9781785375804
Get your copy

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

John Ware is an award-winning investigative journalist with over four decades’ experience reporting on security, intelligence, and public accountability. A former BBC Panorama correspondent, he has led major investigations into policing, national security, and state power, including extensive reporting on Northern Ireland.

Out Now 📚 John Ware