Further details have been revealed, shedding light on the controversy that led to Brian Stanleythe TD Laois-Offaly, resigned from Sinn Féin.

As first revealed by the Irish Times on Saturday, a complaint made by a woman following an encounter with Mr Stanley in Dublin on the night of October 11, 2023 led an internal Sinn Féin investigation to conclude in a draft report that the conduct of the TD on the night constituted “sexual harassment”.

The 18-page draft report – seen by this newspaper – says this amounted to “serious misconduct” and breached the Sinn Féin party’s ethical and disciplinary guidelines.

Before the party’s seven-day deadline for Mr Stanley to comment on the draft report was reached, Mr Stanley – on the night of last Saturday October 12 – issued a public statement resigning from the party.

The TD, a former senior Sinn Féin figure who has since been replaced by the party as chairman of the powerful public accounts committee, sharply criticized the party’s internal investigation and its work.

More information can now be revealed about what the inquest discovered about what happened that night and how, in some ways, the woman’s and Mr Stanley’s accounts within the framework of the investigation are in direct conflict.

The woman at the center of the controversy got to know the now former Sinn Féin TD around ten years ago through her voluntary work within the party. She worked for the party for a period in 2016 and 2017, but her employment ended after a trial period.

Internal party documents show Mr Stanley suggested to the inquiry that the woman’s dissatisfaction with how the party had treated her was relevant to his work, but she insisted he did not There was no problem and it had happened years earlier.

Last year the woman sought advice from Mr Stanley about applying for a job in the EU.

She claimed at the inquest in the run-up to its October 2023 meeting that he had phoned her several times, although her account was strongly denied by Mr Stanley.

She initially suggested having coffee in Portlaoise, but Mr Stanley insisted the meeting took place at Leinster House in the evening, she claimed in evidence at the inquest. Mr Stanley told the inquest the young woman told him it was fine for her to come to Dublin to meet him.

She denied this, saying the Dublin meeting took place at her insistence.

A meeting has been scheduled for the evening of Wednesday October 11, 2023.

Early in the evening, the woman texted Mr. Stanley to inform him that there were storm warnings and that they might have to postpone the meeting. She told the inquest that he had phoned her several times to assure her she had to come. He told the inquest that he had agreed to the meeting “reluctantly”; she claimed she felt constant pressure to travel to Dublin to meet him.

She told the inquest that Mr Stanley told her he had booked a room for her; he categorically denies it in his testimony at the inquiry.

When she arrived in Dublin, Mr Stanley met her outside Leinster House and drove her car to the car park. They dined in the Leinster House canteen, each drinking a glass of wine. They then went to a nearby pub, where they had two more drinks – the woman claims she felt pressured to drink, but Mr Stanley denies this – and then to the hotel where the TD was staying near.

He told the inquest the woman was wondering where she would stay or whether she should go home (she lives outside Dublin). He told her that he had booked a room for himself and that she could “go up there” – as he had expected there to be two beds, a double and a single, in his room.

The woman told the inquest that Mr Stanley had assured her that he had reserved a room for her; he denied this.

He told the inquest he was surprised there was only one bed in the room; she said she was shocked that there was only one room and one bed, but felt like she couldn’t go anywhere else.

Mr Stanley told the inquest that he slept on the floor; the woman said no. There is no suggestion of physical engagement or anything of an illegal nature.

However, the woman told the inquest she was deeply traumatized and upset by what happened. Mr Stanley claimed she became “angry and annoyed” the next morning when he did not want to discuss the circumstances of her departure from her role within Sinn Féin six years earlier – which the woman firmly denied.

The woman told the inquest she had been left distraught and traumatized in the days following the incident.

She contacted Mr Stanley by text message on Friday morning to let him know how she felt – and make a demand for €60,000 to compensate him.

Text messages given to the inquest show she told Mr Stanley she deserved “compensation” for the “emotional trauma” he put her through on Wednesday night and demanded that if he left 60,000 € in cash divided into six envelopes in her mailbox, she “won’t push things further”.

Mr. Stanley responded in a text: “God (name redacted). You know I will never do anything wrong with you. I would never do that. And for me, it’s just friendship. That’s all we’ve always had a good working relationship. Please this has been (sic) totally honest.

The woman replied, “I have nothing else to say.” I will consider not sharing what happened as long as you compensate for the emotional harm. Don’t contact me anymore.

He apologized in another text, saying: “I’m sorry (sic) if I caused this but my goodness (name redacted) you’ve known me long enough to know I’m genuine.” And I’m really sorry and I really mean it. Please accept this (name redacted).

The woman now says her request for money was a “reckless, foolish and ill-advised decision while she was in a state of shock and helplessness”.

She said she never followed through on the request for money and instead spoke to a helpline and loved ones to help her deal with the emotional toll of the incident .

Mr Stanley strongly disputed the woman’s version of events and claimed there was a plot within the party to remove him.

But the party’s investigation found in its draft report that Mr Stanley’s responses to his request for money were not consistent with his version of events.

The investigation concluded in its draft findings that he had sent her texts in which he apologized and did not dispute that something had happened. The investigation found the text exchanges suggested she was telling the truth and were crucial to her decision.

He found that he acknowledged that something had happened and apologized for it, rather than denying any impropriety and wondering why he was being asked for money.

Referring to messages exchanged between the woman and Mr Stanley, the inquiry concluded in the draft report that “any reasonable assessment gives credence to the complainant’s account of events.” The threads talk about a complainant insisting something bad happened and a defendant apologizing every last text…

“At no point does the Defendant (Mr. Stanley) deny that anything bad happened or question what the Plaintiff is referring to (as one would expect if the Defendant’s account of events is true).

“All of this, in the committee’s view, gives credit to the plaintiff and not the defendant.”

On a few other matters, the inquiry also concluded that Mr Stanley’s evidence was “not credible”.

After hearing evidence from both parties, the three-person Sinn Féin investigation team reached its preliminary findings on October 5 and wrote to both parties with a copy of its draft report.

He concluded that “taking into account all available evidence, on the balance of probabilities, the account put forward by the complainant is substantially true.”

She concluded that his conduct “constituted a breach of the Sinn Féin Ethics Charter”, as his conduct constituted “sexual harassment” and, as such, “serious misconduct”.

Each party had seven days to comment or submit observations on the conclusions proposed in the draft report. After five days, Mr Stanley issued a statement highly critical of the investigation and announced his resignation from the party.

“Given what happened and the work of my legal team, what is very clear is that this process lacked objectivity, was seriously flawed and lacking impartiality,” he said in a statement. press release issued through his lawyers.

“This ‘investigation’ has been shown to lack any credibility, particularly due to a significant abuse of process. In many ways it resembled a sort of kangaroo courtship. The legal review of this matter will continue. He said he would continue to represent the people of Laois as an “independent republican”.

Mr Stanley’s resignation from the party meant the investigation process had ended. The party referred the matter to the Guard following his resignation.

In response to detailed questions from the Irish Times on Friday, his lawyers issued a new statement. They particularly criticized the leak of the draft investigation report, stressing that it was a “draft report and not a final report.”

“His provisional conclusions, unfavorable to our client, are completely denied and our client continues to assert that they are not supported by the evidence presented to the commission responsible for the investigation.

“We reiterate our client’s categorical denial of any wrongdoing on his part,” Mr. Stanley’s lawyers said. They went on to claim that Sinn Féin’s disciplinary procedures “have been clearly abused throughout”.

This weekend, the woman at the center of the complaint, who spoke to the Irish Times last week, also spoke to several other media outlets. She was highly critical of Sinn Féin’s handling of the process, saying the party was trying to protect itself rather than defend it.

On Sunday, Sinn Féin said in response to questions from the Irish Times that it “does not comment on the details of internal party investigations.” These matters are now a matter for gardaí.

Like the general election draws closer and closer, the controversy seems likely to continue.