A photograph taken during President Catherine Connolly’s visit to Belfast has reopened one of the most painful cases of the Troubles.
Ms Mary McArdle (Irish republican and former Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) member), is the only person convicted of the 1984 murder of Belfast teacher Ms Mary Travers.
President Connolly visited the the Falls Women’s Centre on Wednesday, August 5th 2026, during a series of official engagements connected with Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann. The visit is recorded in the President’s official diary.
The photograph shows Ms McArdle standing right, beside the President. It has not been established whether President Connolly knew McArdle would be present, recognised her or deliberately chose to stand beside her. It was a group photograph rather than a private meeting between the two women.
Nevertheless, the image has caused considerable distress to Mary Travers’s family.
Mary’s sister, Ms Ann Travers, said she was deeply upset to see the President standing and smiling beside the woman convicted of involvement in her sister’s murder. She has now reportedly called for an apology and asked President Connolly to press Ms McArdle to provide information about the other people involved in that attack.
The reason for that distress goes back to Sunday, 8 April 1984.
Ms Mary Travers was walking home from Mass at St Brigid’s Church in south Belfast with her parents, when an IRA unit attacked the family. The intended target was her father, Resident Magistrate Mr Tom Travers.
Mr Travers was shot six times but survived. Mary was shot in the back and killed. A gun was also placed close to the face of her mother, Joan, but it jammed when the attacker attempted to fire.
Ms Mary Travers was a young primary-school teacher. Contemporary accounts differ over whether she was aged 22 or 23, but her family describes her as 23 years old.
Mary Ann McArdle, then 19 years old, was arrested shortly after the attack. She was found carrying the two handguns used in the shooting, concealed on her person, along with disguise material.
Although Ms McArdle was not identified as one of the two male gunmen, the court convicted her of murder for her participation in the IRA operation. She received a life sentence for Ms Mary Travers’s murder and a concurrent 18-year sentence for the attempted murder of Mr Tom Travers.
Another defendant, Mr Joseph Patrick Haughey, was accused of being one of the gunmen. He was acquitted after doubts arose over identification and the lack of sufficient forensic evidence. No one else was convicted.
Ms McArdle served approximately only 14 years before being released in 1998 under the early-release provisions associated with the Good Friday Agreement.
The case returned to public attention in 2011 when Sinn Féin appointed Ms McArdle as a special adviser to Stormont Culture Minister Carál Ní Chuilín.
Ms McArdle subsequently described Mary Travers’s killing as a “tragic mistake” and expressed regret that it had happened. The Travers family rejected that response as inadequate.
Ms McArdle was also reported to have declined to assist the Historical Enquiries Team in identifying the other members of the IRA unit.
The controversy surrounding her political appointment ultimately contributed to Stormont legislation restricting people with serious criminal convictions from serving as ministerial special advisers.
President Connolly cannot reasonably be accused of knowingly endorsing Ms McArdle merely because the two appeared beside one another in a group photograph. There is presently no public evidence that the President knew in advance who would be standing beside her.
But the President’s office must still answer an important question; what checks, if any, were carried out before an official photograph placed the Irish head of state beside the only person convicted of Ms Mary Travers’s murder?
For the Travers family, this is not an abstract political dispute or an argument about historical symbolism. Mary was their daughter and sister. She was shot in the back while walking home from Mass, and more than 42 years later most of those responsible have never been brought to justice.
Whatever the explanation for the photograph, the hurt it caused was entirely foreseeable, and deserves a direct and compassionate response.
Leave a Reply