Our Lady of Darkness

began her plea. There was nothing else to do but proceed as best she could.

‘Brehon of Laigin, I wish to make a formal appeal to you to postpone the execution of the Saxon, Brother Eadulf, until such time as a proper enquiry and a new trial can be arranged.’

Forbassach continued to regard her with an unchanging sour expression. Fidelma found his attitude almost contemptuous.

‘An appeal must be backed by the weight of evidence of irregularities of the first trial, Fidelma of Cashel,’ Forbassach acknowledged dryly. ‘What are the reasons for your appeal?’

‘There are several irregularities in the presentation of evidence at the trial.’

Forbassach’s disagreeable expression seem to deepen.

‘Irregularities? Doubtless you are suggesting that such irregularities are due to the fact that I, who presided at that trial, am responsible for them?’

‘I am well aware that you presided at the trial, Forbassach. I have already made my objection known to your judging your own conduct.’

‘So what are you charging me with? What exactly?’ His voice was cold and menacing.

‘I am not charging you with anything, Forbassach. You know enough of the law not to misinterpret my words,’ snapped Fidelma. ‘An appeal is merely to lay facts before the court and put forward questions, the answers are left to the court to pursue.’

Bishop Forbassach’s eyes narrowed at her barbed response.

‘Let me hear your so-called facts and you may also ask your questions, dálaigh. It cannot be said that I am not a fair man.’

Fidelma felt as if she were beating against a wall of granite and tried to gather some inner strength.

‘I appeal on the grounds of irregularities of law. I would present the following specific points.

‘Firstly, Brother Eadulf was a messenger between King Colgú of Cashel and the Archbishop Theodore of Canterbury. He had the protection and privilege of the rank that entails. This rank was not taken into account during the proceedings. He carried a written letter and the white wand of an ollamh, a messenger who had immunity from legal proceedings.’

‘A white wand of office? A message?’ Bishop Forbassach sounded amused. ‘They were not presented in evidence.’

‘Brother Eadulf was not allowed the opportunity. I present them now …’ Fidelma turned to pick up the objects from the bench on which she had placed them. She held them out for examination.

‘Retrospective evidence is no evidence,’ Bishop Forbassach smiled. ‘Your evidence is inadmissible. Bringing such items with you from Cashel …’

‘I found them in the guests’ hostel of the abbey where Brother Eadulf had left them,’ Fidelma retorted, angry at Forbassach’s attempt to dismiss them.

‘How are we to know that?’

‘Because Sister Étromma was with me when I found them in the mattress of the bed which she identified as that which Brother Eadulf had used.’

Bishop Forbassach turned his gaze to where Sister Étromma was sitting.

‘Stand forward, Sister. Is this true?’

Sister Étromma was clearly nervous of Bishop Forbassach and also cast a frightened glance towards the abbess as she stood up.

‘I accompanied the Sister into the guests’ hostel and she bent over the mattress and then produced those items.’

‘Did you see her actually find the items?’ pressed the Brehon.

‘She had her back towards me and turned from the bed to show me.’

‘Then she may well have been carrying the items on her person and only pretended to find them?’ suggested Bishop Forbassach with a note of satisfaction. ‘The evidence cannot be submitted.’

Fidelma was outraged.

‘I protest! As a dálaigh, I am sworn to uphold the law and your insinuation besmirches my honour!’

‘As a Brehon, I have also sworn the same oath and yet you dare question my judgments!’ snapped Forbassach. ‘What is sauce for the goose will also be sauce for the gander. Continue with your case.’

Fidelma swallowed hard, trying to keep control of her emotions. Losing her temper would benefit no one, least of all Eadulf.

‘Secondly, Brother Eadulf was awaken from his sleep, assaulted and taken to a cell without being told of what he had been accused. He was kept in the cell for two days without food or water. It was only when Forbassach came and told him the nature of the crime of which he was accused that he knew why he was being detained. No advocate, no dálaigh, was appointed in his defence, neither was he allowed toquestion the evidence. He was asked only to admit his guilt.’

‘If he had been innocent, he could have presented his evidence,’ grumbled Bishop Forbassach. ‘All of what you say, anyway, is merely based on the word of the Saxon. These claims are denied. Proceed.’

Fidelma went on stubbornly.

‘Then let us refer to the irregularities of the witness statements. Sister Étromma came forward to identify the dead girl. How could she identify her when she had never seen her before she was confronted by her dead body? She had been told that she was a novitiate in the abbey. Yet she did not know that fact at first hand.’

‘The mistress of the novitiates told her.’

‘She had already left on a pilgrimage. Even if she had, you know the law, Forbassach. She did not know the girl from her own personal experience. Étromma’s evidence was not valid according to the rules of the court.’

‘That is a matter for the judge,’ replied Bishop Forbassach tightly. ‘I judged that the matter of identification was not important; so long as the girl was identified it does not matter by whom.’

‘We are talking of rules of law,’ Fidelma responded. ‘But let us continue to the next witness — the physician, Brother Miach, who examined the body. He swore that the girl had been forcibly raped. True, she was a virgin who had had intercourse just before her death. That much, as a physician, he should have told us. But our physician brings opinion into his evidence and his opinion was that the girl had been raped. Now, I am not saying that she wasn’t, just that an opinion is not evidence and should not have been accepted as such. The evidence does not indicate beyond question the type of intercourse which happened before the girl’s death. Was it the crime of focloir or sleth; forcible rape, or rape by persuasion? This should have been pointed out and considered.

‘Now comes the evidence of Sister Fial who is the key witness … an eye-witness. She says that she is a friend of the dead girl. They became novitiates in the abbey at the same time. They were both under the age of choice. Sister Fial says that she had made an arrangement to meet the dead girl on the quay outside the abbey at a time which must have been well after midnight. No one has asked why at the trial, or for what purpose. Is it not strange that twelve- or thirteen-year-old novitiates are wandering outside the abbey at such an hour? Are these important questions dealt with? No, they are not.

‘Next, Fial says that in the darkness, down on the quay, she sees a man attacking and strangling her friend. She must have walked within a metre of where the attack was happening. What does she do in response to the sight? She simply stands by the bales and watches while her friend is assaulted and strangled. She sees the man running back to the abbey and entering it. All in the dark. She stands undecided what to do — how long, we are not told. We cannot even ask her because Sister Fial seems to have disappeared from the abbey. She stands, making no attempt to go to her friend. The abbess comes along and still she continues to remain in the silent shadows while Mel examines the body. It is a long time before she emerges to tell her story.’

She paused; a total silence had descended.

‘Then we have the evidence of Mel, the captain of the watch, who, coming to the quay, sees the figure of the abbess, Abbess Fainder, on horseback looking down at the body. Yet at no time was the abbess called to give evidence as to her role in this business. She points the body out to Mel. It is Mel and his comrade, Daig, who take charge and are eventually told by the girl, Fial, our missing witness, that she identifies the attacker as the Saxon