Adams Troubles Legacy trial collapses over legal cost fears

IRA victims withdrew case over fears they could face a six-figure legal costs bill

MARK HENNESSY and FREYA McCLEMENTS, Irish Times, March 21st, 2026

A decision by three men injured in IRA bombings in England to withdraw a High Court case against Gerry Adams could result in the former Sinn Féin leader being spared years of civil actions from Troubles-era victims.

The decision came after the judge raised the possibility of Jonathan Ganesh, Barry Laycock and John Clark footing a bill totalling hundreds of thousands of pounds in Adams’s legal costs if they lost.

During a London civil case seeking £1 in vindicatory damages, lawyers for the men argued Adams was a senior IRA figure, despite decades of denials. They said he ordered the Old Bailey bombing in 1973, as well as 1996 bombings in London Docklands and Manchester.

Judge Jonathan Swift had raised questions for several days over whether the men’s claim for personal injuries against Adams was an abuse of process because its real ambition went beyond their claim for damages.

Legacy legislation being considered by Westminster may open the door for further actions against Adams. However, the outcome of this case raises the stakes for anyone else considering legal action against the former Sinn Féin president.

Speaking in Belfast yesterday, Adams, who did not attend the last day of the two-week trial, said he was pleased the case had been withdrawn, but that the three men had been used by others.

The proceedings verged on “a show trial”, he said, with “anonymous secret agents of the British state hiding” behind screens, while others “up to their neck in subversion” had made unfounded claims.

Adams said throughout that he had never been an IRA member and had nothing to do with the three bombings.

Sympathy

He said he had “nothing but sympathy” for the claimants, adding he was “particularly moved” by the testimony of Laycock and Ganesh in relation to the suffering they had endured.

The case yesterday came to a sudden and surprising end after Anne Studd, barrister for the claimants, sought a 90-minute adjournment until noon. When it resumed, Studd said it had been agreed between the sides that the case would be withdrawn, with no order for costs. She said the judge’s actions had forced her side’s hand.

Adams’s lawyer, Edward Craven, had never argued that the case should be dismissed on abuse grounds until he was specifically asked by the judge to offer legal arguments on the matter.

Two years ago, Judge Michael Soole, who dealt with earlier chapters in what has been a four-year legal battle, had dismissed the possibility that the case could fall on such grounds. Despite opposition from Adams’s lawyers, he issued a costs protection order in favour of the three men, guaranteeing they would not face having to pay Adams’s legal bill, even if they lost.

The anger of the solicitors for the claimants towards Swift was evident yesterday. They accused the judge of making “extraordinary” and “unnecessary” interventions that forced the case’s withdrawal.

Swift never ruled on the issue of abuse, though it is clear at least two of the three men involved believed their protection from having to pay Adams’s costs was seriously threatened.

In a statement, Laycock said: “I’m completely devastated. The fair trial we sought – getting Mr Adams into the dock for the first time – was achieved. But somehow we have lost our protection.

“How is that fair on me or all the victims who deserve justice? We can all hold our heads up high. Our team have worked tirelessly and achieved something that successive governments have failed to do.”

Dublin and Monaghan bombings briefings ‘legally indefensible’

ALAN ERWIN, Irish News and Belfast Telegraph, March 21st, 2026

AN investigative briefing given to relatives of those killed in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings is legally indefensible, the High Court heard yesterday.

Counsel for the family of murdered loyalist William Marchant also confirmed they are challenging the entire validity of the Operation Den-ton process.

A judge will now adjudicate on claims that the team of detectives do not have statutory powers to carry out a non-criminal inquiry. Mr Justice McLaughlin said it was in the public interest to establish first if they can produce a report before making determination on its contents.

Operation Denton detectives have been examining nearly 130 murders during the 1970s attributed to the so-called Glenanne Gang.

Based in the Mid Ulster area, the terror unit was said to have comprised members of the UVF along with some corrupt RUC officers and locally-recruited UDR soldiers.

It has been blamed for the May 1974 attacks on Dublin and Monaghan when 33 people, including a pregnant woman, were killed and almost 300 others injured in co-ordinated explosions.

In December last year a summary issued by the Operation Denton review team found evidence of collusion between loyalist terrorists and some police officers and members of the military at the time.

However, no intelligence pointing to any state co-operation in specific UVF attacks was identified.

Relatives of Marchant are now pressing ahead with a challenge to both the legal status of the Operation Denton probe and the right to publish a final report containing any findings of individual culpability.

Concerns have been raised that he could be linked to the Dublin and Monaghan attacks through jigsaw identification.

Widely reported to have been a leading loyalist figure, Marchant was shot dead by the IRA on Belfast’s Shankill Road in April 1987.

Lawyers representing his family claim police do not have the statutory power to commission a non-criminal investigation.

Part of the case relates to a briefing given to campaign groups and some of those bereaved in the Dublin and Monaghan massacres. The names of some suspected bombers were reportedly disclosed at that meeting in Dublin in October 2025.

Marchant’s legal team contend that any such disclosures represent a breach of human rights laws.

Legal challenge to Denton Report

Referring to the briefing in court yesterday, John Larkin KC argued: “It’s clear, based not least on the exchange between the parties, that there can be no valid defence of that event.”

He also stressed that the entire Operation Denton process is under challenge.

Following submissions, Mr Justice McLaughlin indicated he will hear the bid to have the investigation declared unlawful before dealing with its findings.

“There is a public interest in everybody having clarity on whether the report can be produced at all because there is little point in police progressing that work now if (it can’t),” the judge stated.

Speaking on behalf of the Marchant family outside court, campaigner Jamie Bryson claimed there is no lawful basis for police to conduct a non-criminal investigation as a “de-facto mini public inquiry”.

Mr Bryson added: “The briefing delivered in Dublin is plainly unlawful (and) there is no credible defence to that being mounted by the PSNI.

“All those family briefings will, we anticipate, in due course be quashed and rendered as never having had any lawful force or effect.”

Concern over potential legal bill brings eight-day court case to an end

Mark Hennessy, Ireland and Britain Editor, Irish Times, March 21st, 2026

Former SF leader leaves with a win and a legal bill after a case that, had it gone the other way, could have seen him facing claims for rest of his days

There was a moment on Thursday evening in court 16 at the royal courts of justice on the Strand in London when it started to seem as if the civil action taken against Gerry Adams by three victims of IRA bombings was in trouble.

On a number of occasions during eight days in the high court, judge Jonathan Swift queried if he should hear from both legal teams as to whether the case itself was an abuse of process.

In English and Welsh civil law, a judge is able to stop, stay or strike out a case if they decide the legal process – in this case a civil claim for personal injuries damages – is being used unjustly or improperly.

He had mentioned the issue a few times, and it clearly troubled him, though observers could have been forgiven for thinking the message had not been fully absorbed by lawyers for the plaintiffs.

The case, seeking vindicatory damages of £1, was taken in May 2022 by Barry Laycock, injured in the Manchester Arndale bomb in 1996; Jonathan Ganesh, injured in Canary Wharf that year; and John Clark, injured in the Old Bailey bombing in 1973.

‘Procedurally unfair’

By Thursday afternoon, however, the full import of the judge’s thinking had struck home with barrister Anne Studd, who insisted that such an order would be deeply unfair to the three men.

Responding to the judge’s call for arguments, Studd said it would “be procedurally unfair” if the men’s case – which had been running for more than a week at that stage – was to fall.

She acknowledged that the three “may well have said” before the case that they were taking the action on their behalf and on behalf of other Troubles victims, but none of that raised a question about their right to pursue it.

Questions about their motivations could have been put to the two who gave evidence, Ganesh and Laycock – Clark was too unwell – but the defendant’s legal team had not done so, she said.

In reality, they had been asked many such questions in the witness box, though the judge told Studd that they could be brought back for further evidence if any issue of fairness needed to be repaired.

In her final words in the case shortly after noon yesterday, Studd argued that the claimants were withdrawing because they could not afford to take the risk of becoming liable for Adams’s costs.

Costs protection order

Two years ago, they were awarded a costs protection order that ensured they were able to fight the case with certainty that they would not be made liable for Adams’s costs, even if they eventually lost.

But once the judge raised the issue of abuse of process, it was clear that the costs order would be reviewed if Swift decided to throw it out on those grounds, she said. That was the sole reason why they were withdrawing.

The judge was in no mood to hear such arguments, however, telling Studd that such matters were better ventilated outside of the royal courts of justice.

Edward Craven, barrister for Adams, acknowledged it was the judge rather than his side who had raised the abuse of process issue, but he added that they had reflected deeply on the question.

Having done so, Craven said they were satisfied that a proper application of the principles governing abuse of process showed “it does cross the threshold” that would justify striking out the case.

Cases are an abuse if they are taken to cause a defendant collateral damage, or “expense, harassment or prejudice beyond the scope of what is ordinarily encountered in the course of properly conducted litigation”, he said.

Contacts were made between the legal teams overnight, though the full detail of these was not shared by either the victors or the defeated legal team, but they agreed that the case would be withdrawn, with no order for costs.

The claimants had raised £110,000 from a crowdfunding campaign that, to quote Ganesh, received many small donations of “three quid or a fiver”. The majority had come from a small number of larger donations.

Throughout the case, the Adams side was confident, if frequently irritated by the nature of the evidence put before the court from a former IRA member, Shane Paul O’Doherty, and ex-soldiers and police.

In the eyes of Adams, his decision to turn up every day, bar yesterday morning, was a signal of his willingness to show respect for those injured by the IRA during the years of the Troubles.

However, the decision to turn up on the first day in a stab vest, or a bulletproof vest – it has never become clear which – catapulted the story to the top of the headlines in Belfast, if not anywhere else.

Equally, there were signs of an alternative commentary being prepared in the event of the case going against him, as illustrated by Adams’s decision to talk about the long history of the Irish people not getting justice in the English courts.

The final outcome leaves Adams with a win and a financial bill that runs into six figures, though he may see it as a small price to pay after a case that, had it gone the other way, could have left him facing civil claims for compensation for the rest of his days.

WITHDRAWAL 'DOES NOT REPRESENT VICTORY' FOR FORMER SF PRESIDENT, SAY COMPLAINANTS

KURTIS REID, Belfast Telegraph, March 21st, 2026

WITHDRAWAL 'DOES NOT REPRESENT VICTORY' FOR FORMER SF PRESIDENT, STRESS COMPLAINANTS

Three men injured in IRA bombings in England have insisted the collapse of their civil case against Gerry Adams “does not represent a victory” for the former Sinn Fein president.

The men — John Clark, Jonathan Ganesh and Barry Laycock — were suing Mr Adams, claiming he was personally liable for injuries they received in bombings in London and Manchester in the 1970s and 1990s.

They were seeking a symbolic £1 in damages. Mr Adams has always denied being in the IRA.

All three men have withdrawn their case against Mr Adams, their lawyers told the court yesterday.

In a statement on behalf of the three men, they claim they were approached by Mr Adams yesterday to settle the case on a 'drop-hands basis' — a term in legal proceedings to describe a situation where parties agree to settle their disputes without any party being liable for the other's legal costs.

The men said they were forced to settle the case, otherwise they would face “life-changing consequences”.

“The trial judge's decision to raise this issue resulted, for the first time, in a real risk that the claimants — vulnerable victims of terrorism — could face devastating personal liability for legal costs, as finding of abuse of process would remove the claimants' costs protection and require them to pay Mr Adams his full legal costs,” the statement said.

“Due to this extraordinary series of events, and faced with even a small risk of life-changing financial consequences, the claimants had no realistic choice but to accept the defendant's offer.”

The claimants also pointed to the timing of the offer, noting that it came after Mr Adams had undergone two days of cross-examination during which he was challenged on allegations about his role within the IRA.

They maintained that their decision to accept the offer did not reflect any lack of confidence in their case and said the case had been brought not for financial gain, but in an effort to establish accountability for the attacks in which they were injured.

£1 damages

“They sought £1 in damages, not for financial gain, but for personal vindication and the truth,” the statement added.

The claimants also argued that, despite the absence of any legal ruling, the proceedings had achieved something significant by forcing Mr Adams to give evidence in court.

“For the first time, Mr Adams was brought before an English court and compelled to give evidence and face cross-examination on his alleged role,” they said, explaining that a large volume of material relating to Mr Adams' alleged involvement in the Provisional IRA had now been aired publicly.

“A substantial body of evidence concerning his alleged involvement in the PIRA has now been placed on the public record,” the statement said.

“That material has been widely reported on and, even if the court may not now do so, it will be available for judgment by history.”

The claimants said they considered the situation to be unfair, given the length of time and effort invested in the proceedings.

“The claimants consider this deeply unfair,” the statement said.

“They have spent years preparing their case, at significant personal cost.”

Despite the case ending without a judgment, they insisted they still viewed the proceedings as meaningful.

Speaking to the media in Belfast yesterday, Mr Adams said he had “nothing but sympathy” for the claimants.

‘I’ve been shot myself’

He said: “I was moved by the testimony of the two people, the two men, who came forward and told of their own personal difficulties and circumstances within the explosions and following the explosions. Family members of mine have been killed. I've been shot myself. So I know what it's like.”

Mr Adams said he believed the civil case against him had “verged upon a show trial” at times.

The former Sinn Fein president said he had no criticism of the judge in the proceedings, “but at times it verged upon a show trial: anonymous secret agents of the British state hiding behind the screen; others who were up to their necks in the subversion that the British state visited upon people of this part of the island of Ireland. Many members of the intelligence services who have been found responsible for collusion, and others not by anyone other than the British Government's own commissions and inquiries and investigations.

“So it clearly was, I said at the beginning of the trial, an unorthodox and strategically important political case taken for that purpose. I don't fault the claimants for that.”

He also said he had not claimed that the discontinuation of court proceedings was a victory for him.

Asked about comments from lawyers representing the claimants that the case was “not a victory”, Mr Adams said: “I am not even going to comment on that. I never claimed it to be a victory.”

Mr Adams also confirmed he would be paying his own legal bill “supported by friends”, adding: “I was never going to make an effort to burden the claimants with my legal bill.”

DUP MP Gregory Campbell said the withdrawal of the case “cannot be the end of the matter” and that there was an “ongoing need to pursue justice”.

UUP leader Jon Burrows said there should be a public inquiry into the leadership of the IRA: “This case proves once again that the courts alone cannot deliver the full truth.”

Artists and schoolchildren illustrate GCS piece wall’

AMY COCHRANE, Belfast Telegraph, Marcg 21st, 2026

A group of Belfast schoolchildren is helping to shape how visitors will be welcomed to the city as part of a street art project.

The When Walls Speak Welcome scheme will also see a new mural created by more than 20 street artists unveiled at Grand Central Station next week.

As part of the design process, Translink is holding events in which the artists visit schools close to the station to gather ideas.

The seven schools involved are St Joseph's PS, Blythefield PS, Fane Street PS, Donegall Road PS, St Mary's PS, Royal Belfast Academical Institution (Inst) and St Louise's College.

Each school will receive a bespoke artwork as part of the project.

Grand Central Station, which opened in 2024, welcomes more than 20 million people to the city each year, and Translink wanted to ensure schoolchildren from the area were “co-authors” of the mural, into which their words and drawings will be incorporated.

Programme manager Louise Sterrit said Translink wanted to place young people's voices “at the heart of the station” and create a space that “reflects the communities [Grand Central] serves and the future they are helping to shape”.

She continued: “This programme builds on the award-winning approach Translink developed at York Street Station, where we saw the power of artists working directly with communities and young people to transform transport spaces.

“The pupils involved in this project are not simply participants. They are co-creators.

“Their drawings, words and ideas form the starting point for the artwork that will greet visitors arriving into Belfast.”

The programme is being delivered in partnership with Daisychain, a community arts organisation that has run workshops in the schools involved, as well as leading pupils on street art tours around the city.

‘Built on collaboration’

Daisychain co-director Adam Turkington said the entire project was “built on collaboration”.

He added: “Young people are not just taking part. They are helping to shape how their city looks and feels and how it welcomes [people].

“I think it's important to teach young people the importance of aesthetics, because often, as a population, we just put up with a city that looks very utilitarian, very functional and essentially very capitalist. There's no real care and attention given to how something looks.

“I think it's really important to teach young people to expect that things shouldn't just look like grey concrete, and that beauty isn't something that they should sacrifice.”

Adam said Translink was helping to reshape how murals were seen.

He continued: “Through this project, it's nice to hear how people want to see murals that reflect not just this one single part of our identity.

“We have lots of other aspects that are also important to us, and we get very caught up in this country on focusing just on those things that divide us. When we focus on the other things that unite us, it can be a really powerful thing.”

Nuala Convery, who is helping to facilitate the project as part of Daisychain, has been creating murals and street art around the city for more than 10 years. She also helped deliver the guided tours for children.

“One of the main reasons I do what I do is to help make the city look better,” she said.

“Street art is so accessible to everyone. Not all of these kids will have parents who will take them to art galleries or museums, so they can literally see artwork for free this way.

“Through this project, it's really important for young people to feel like their voice is actually heard.

“It's good for them to be like 'I actually matter', because it's affecting how the landscape of the city looks with this project around Grand Central.

“Their voices are going to be a part of a huge piece of land that millions of people will be walking past every year.”

Belfast artist Kerrie Hanna has been delivering workshops in schools, and recently completed a mural at Donegall Road Primary.

She said she wanted to inspire the children and incorporate their designs into her work.

“It's good to see them get excited and draw out those ideas about symbols and patterns that are important to them,” Kerrie added.

“I want them to feel an ownership over this artwork because then they'll feel connected to it.”

Inspiring children for the future

Donegall Road PS vice-principal Dan Stringer said his pupils were excited to “share their vision” of what the school represents and put a positive spin on murals.

He continued: “It inspires the children for the future. The message around the mural in the school is 'dream big', something the children can see and be inspired by every day.

“When their younger brothers and sisters come here, they can say, 'Look I did that. I was a part of that', and it can be something that the community can celebrate for years to come.”

Conor Doris, an art and photography teacher at St Louise's College who is also part of the project, said his pupils had loved Kerrie's workshop.

“The whole project has opened the children's eyes to street art and the benefits of it,” he told the Belfast Telegraph.

St Louise's College pupil Leela Kennedy (16) said she felt privileged to have been taught the art of spray-painting.

“I've never used it properly before, so it was loads of fun,” she added.

“Our school's motto is 'Inspire, nurture, achieve', so we kind of wanted to do something in the mural to reflect this.

“Whenever I think of murals, it's political or something that conveys a straightforward message.

“But when we went on the street art tour... all our lives we've been told we need to get out of Belfast, but it was so lovely to see all the street art and see people appreciate our culture and our community.”

Leona Gastardo, a Year 10 pupil at the school, said street art made “Belfast brighter”.

The programme is supported by Arts & Business NI. A collaborative 'Street Art Jam' will be held at Grand Central Station on March 28 and 29, with more schools' murals to be unveiled in the coming days.

91% of Queen's students back English and Irish signs

BRETT CAMPBELL, Belfast Telegraph, March 21st, 2026

'STRONG MANDATE' HAILED AS OVER 5,000 VOTE IN ONLINE REFERENDUM

Over 90% of students at Queen's University Belfast who took part in a poll on dual Irish and English signage on campus have backed the proposal.

Queen's Students' Union (QSU) held an online poll in recent days.

Those eligible were asked whether both languages should be given equal status, and if the university's name and logo should be in English and Irish.

“An all-student vote on 'language rights in Queen's University Belfast'... has concluded with 91% supporting the proposal,” QSU posted on Facebook.

It revealed that more than 5,000 ballots were cast.

It added: “Under its constitution and rules, Queen's Students' Union is required to hold an all-student vote... on a proposal if it receives a petition with the necessary level of support.

“QSU received a petition to hold an all-student vote on 'language rights in Queen's University Belfast' from members of the Irish language speaking community on campus.

“The proposal was put to an all-student vote in accordance with the union's rules.

“Independent groups of students organised both yes and no campaigns.”

QSU said the proposal asked if it should advocate for the university to develop and implement a comprehensive Irish language policy — to include a bilingual corporate identity for the students' union — as well as campus-wide bilingual signage.

Strong mandate sees bilingual signs return

It asked if there should be formal and equal recognition of Irish and English as official languages of the university, in addition to the immediate reinstatement of bilingual signage in the students' union building.

There were bilingual signs in the students' union up until 1997, but they were removed amid opposition from unionists and in light of a recommendation by the Fair Employment Commission to help create a more neutral environment.

“The majority outcome of the referendum means QSU is required to progress the proposal,” it added.

“The union's elected executive management committee will now consider how best to bring forward these detailed and multifaceted proposals to the university.

“QSU remains committed to parity of esteem and cooperation.”

Students' union president Amy Smith said “a strong mandate has been received... to advocate for Irish language rights across campus”.

“The measured tone of the debate amongst students demonstrates how our society can discuss difficult issues,” she added.

“QSU will now engage with the university and other groups to agree a way forward, acknowledging the outcome of the referendum, whilst also remaining committed to promoting mutual respect, understanding and cooperation amongst all communities on campus.”

Queen's Young Unionists society claimed the poll was “sprung upon” it, and said an issue which supporters said was aimed at inclusion would actually exclude members of the PUL community.

A Queen's University spokesperson said the outcome of the referendum “reflects strong student engagement in an important campus debate” and insisted all perspectives are valued.

Unionists flourish at Washington’s Paddy’s Day jamboree during SF boycott

SAM McBRIDE, Northern Ireland Editor, Belfast Telegraph, March 21st, 2026

IN FAILING TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND ITS PEOPLE, THE PARTY LEFT THE DUP UNCHECKED ACCESS TO KEY PLAYERS, WHILE EVEN MISSING A DISCUSSION ON IRISH UNITY

It was a scene which once would have been remarkable. Just a few hundred yards from the White House, the DUP Deputy First Minister stood at a podium in a building run by the Congregation of Holy Cross and introduced a debate on whether there should be a united Ireland.

But equally remarkable was the fact that while Emma Little-Pengelly was comfortable in this position, the Sinn Fein First Minister was boycotting this discussion on the issue which is at the heart of her party's mission.

Who could blame outsiders for finding Northern Irish politics incomprehensible?

What happened in Washington DC this week represents a blunder by Sinn Fein, and a surprisingly effective unionist diplomatic offensive which seemed to surprise some of the unionists involved.

Unionists — and especially the DUP — are used to being presented with open goals, yet managing to steer the ball wide of the beckoning target. This time they didn't.

Having been in Chicago, New York, Washington, Boston and Princeton on a book tour over the last 10 days, I've seen at first-hand a shift in how Northern Ireland is perceived.

It's more than a decade since I was last in the US over St Patrick's Day, and on that occasion I vividly recall being at the huge Boston St Patrick's Day breakfast where Gerry Adams was the guest of honour.

In a room of 500 people packed with Massachusetts' political elite, the then Sinn Fein leader was introduced triumphantly as “a man who has dedicated his entire life to bringing peace to Ireland”. The room erupted in raucous applause.

That will still happen in plenty of places, but it didn't happen this year because Sinn Fein weren't there.

Sinn Fein's boycott over US support for Israel's war in Gaza began last year and it seemed that the party was undecided on whether to continue it into a second year.

Eventually, Mary Lou McDonald came out to say the boycott would continue. Slightly embarrassingly, the US Ambassador to Ireland then publicly said the party hadn't even been invited — and wouldn't have been invited. From the outset the party's stance was confused. Two years ago Sinn Fein rejected some supporters' demands for a boycott over Joe Biden's enthusiastic support for Israel's war in Gaza. McDonald said it was her “responsibility and duty” to go and argue against the killing.

Yet just last year McDonald said that if she was Taoiseach, she would have gone to meet Donald Trump.

That made clear that this wasn't a moral issue, but a semantic political calculation. If she could go as the leader of the Republic, then why couldn't Michelle O'Neill as the joint leader of Northern Ireland?

Nevertheless, not meeting a president who has debased the office he holds is something which will be supported not just by many Sinn Fein voters, but by plenty of voters from all parties.

What's baffling is that Sinn Fein's boycott extended far beyond Trump.

St Patrick's Day in the US — and especially in Washington — is a merry-go-round of events, most of which have nothing to do with the US government.

The party boycotted Irish-American breakfasts, the Northern Ireland Bureau breakfast (run by O'Neill's own department), the huge Ireland Funds gala ball attended by top US political figures, the mammoth Irish Embassy party which attracts more than 800 people, and on and on.

Sinn Fein appears inexplicably incapable of distinguishing between the American people and the American government. The equivalent would be an American refusing to visit the UK because they disagree with King Charles. It's a thoroughly confused and confusing position.

Inconsistent boycott

Even this boycott wasn't in any way consistent. Economy Minister Caoimhe Archibald was happy to go to San Francisco and New York on a trade mission last week.

Sinn Fein's absence was mentioned, but far less than might have been expected. After all, the Taoiseach was there, the Deputy First Minister was there (securing an unusual private meeting with Trump), and a host of senior figures from public life on both sides of the border.

Sinn Fein's most ironic absence was from the discussion on Irish unity, which Little-Pengelly and New York Congressman Timothy Kennedy, introduced.

The event was hosted by the University of Notre Dame in its Washington building on Pennsylvania Avenue and was organised by the Washington Ireland Programme (WIP), which brings together talented young people from across the Irish border.

This was no campaign event for a united Ireland, but a discussion about For and Against a United Ireland, the book I wrote with Fintan O'Toole.

Two impressive young people who'd participated in the WIP, Aoife Joy Keogh and Luke Teggart, questioned us about the topic in front of an audience made up of American political and academic figures, as well as others from home such as the Secretary of State, Chief Constable and Health Minister Mike Nesbitt.

Little-Pengelly's brief introductory remarks were diplomatic, positive and eschewed controversy. She made clear her pride in Northern Ireland and that she was there representing Northern Ireland without in any way seeking to diminish the Irish nature of the St Patrick's Day events.

At a reception afterwards, multiple Americans who had been present remarked on how impressive they'd found her.

One experienced observer said unionists only have to clear a very low bar with Irish-American audiences to evoke pleasant surprise, but she did that, contrary to the caricatures of unionism as incessantly angry, insecure and isolationist.

The previous night, Little-Pengelly had happily posed for a photo with the Taoiseach at the Irish Embassy. That evening she attended the Ireland Funds ball along with other unionist ministers.

The following morning she spoke at the NI Bureau breakfast, a significant event which now attracts an impressive audience of diplomats, investors, academics and others with an interest in Northern Ireland.

Low bar

Addressing about 250 people, the DUP figure remarked wryly on how in Northern Ireland “we have those politicians who perhaps feel themselves to be most Irish and they're not here — but I've got a very, very good representation of unionists” (every unionist minister was present, as was UUP leader Jon Burrows, while Alliance and the SDLP also boycotted the events).

That was a pointed comment which could have been inappropriate in the circumstances, but she then added her party colleague Gordon Lyons would the following evening be hosting an event to mark the end of British rule in the United States. The message was that Northern Ireland is more complicated than it might first appear on the other side of the Atlantic.

The following day Lyons hosted an event on the role of the Ulster-Scots, or Scots Irish, who were so instrumental in building the American state. That evening attracted major figures from Capitol Hill, including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Lyons has prioritised this link to a commemoration which apparently Trump views as highly significant because it falls within his term, and Lyons brought with him David Huddleston, the head of the Public Record Office in Belfast, which has been involved in researching the many links between what is now Northern Ireland and those who worked to end British rule in America. That should have benefits for tourism and a more rounded understanding of Ireland's links to the US. None of this drastically alters the position at home.

The Union is not going to be won or lost in the US. A united Ireland isn't going to be made or broken in the US. But having this level of access to the world's dominant superpower is highly significant for a small island, and an even smaller portion of that island.

Trump's comments in the White House about loving mergers — an unmissable reference to a united Ireland — were typically free-wheeling and mischievous. While hardly welcomed by the DUP, a man this unpredictable could say exactly the opposite tomorrow.

What matters far more is the hundreds of people, many of them in influential positions, who personally met unionist ministers.

Where Little-Pengelly came unstuck this week wasn't in her interactions with Irish-America, but with BBC NI. Asked in an interview about her stance on the Iran War, she danced around the question in a way which appeared slippery.

Asked about whether she'd flown business class, she refused to answer — when she should simply have said: “Of course I did. I'm the joint leader of Northern Ireland, here on business, and the moment I landed I went straight to the first event.”

This needless defensiveness, stemming from Stormont's deeply embedded culture of secrecy, won't have been digested in the US, where they saw a very different Deputy First Minister.

For years Sinn Fein fought to get into the US. Bill Clinton's decision to give Adams a visa in 1994 enraged London and represented a decisive shift in which he had outmanoeuvred not only the entire British system, but large elements of the American system, such as the State Department, which didn't want him in the US. It is remarkable a party that worked so hard to secure access and which is so ruthlessly strategic in its decision-making should walk away from not just the US government, but a host of events which have nothing to do with Trump's administration.

Yet diplomacy has its limits. Good government is harder than good public relations, whether at home or abroad. Warm words and grand gestures alone won't make Northern Ireland work.

After our Washington event, one senior business figure quietly asked me about Dalradian's gold mine proposal in the Sperrins. One of his friends is an investor in the project.

Stormont’s crippling incompetence

Having been invited by Stormont to come and search for gold, after almost a decade the incompetence of Northern Ireland's political and civil service classes means the company can't even get a yes or no answer on its mining proposal.

A day later, Little-Pengelly was urging investment and talking up Stormont's business-friendly policies. Not everyone is going to buy that if they scrutinise the devolved administration's track record.

The DUP's key short-term battle is an electoral one with TUV. Nothing done in recent days on the far side of the Atlantic will do anything to help it in that contest.

But the party's — and unionism's — longer term battle is to save the Union. For as long as it has existed, the DUP has wallowed in being disliked, something bound up in the theology of separation taught by its founder in the Free Presbyterian Church, which viewed with at best suspicion overly warm relations with those viewed as apostate.

As a small party, that was sustainable. As a party which aspires to lead unionism, and to lead Northern Ireland into a sustainable future, it is not.

This has been a good week for unionism in general, and the DUP in particular. Both need far more weeks like this.

Remarkably, there are some in unionism now quietly saying they hope Sinn Fein maintains its boycott next year. An ideology which was once hostile to what it saw as American meddling and which then reluctantly engaged in the St Patrick's jamboree on the basis that it might bring jobs is now actively enthusiastic about an opportunity to access the top of the world's superpower.

While Little-Pengelly was introducing a discussion on Irish unity to an influential audience, O'Neill was answering awkward questions in the Assembly about another blunder — her refusal to engage in British government briefings about the safety of British and Irish citizens in the Middle East.

When O'Neill and Little-Pengelly entered Stormont Castle, it was the former who was dealt the better hand. As Northern Ireland's first nationalist leader, she was already a historic figure and was popular with supporters, while Little-Pengelly was unelected, was from a party which had lost its leader in the most unwelcome circumstances, and which had misled its voters about getting rid of the Irish Sea border.

Two years on and it's Little-Pengelly who has decisively overtaken O'Neill in confidence — even in places where the First Minister would be expected to be far more comfortable.