header-logo header-logo

18 June 2010
Issue: 7422 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bloody Sunday Inquiry

No justification for shootings, states Saville Report

The Bloody Sunday shooting in Derry was “unjustified”, the Saville Report has concluded after a 38-year campaign for justice.

The 5,000-page report published this week after a 12-year inquiry exonerated the victims of the tragedy, concluding some of the soldiers had lied to the inquiry. There is now a possibility that legal action may be brought against the former soldiers, many of whom are now in their 60s.

Lord Saville concluded that none of the 14 civilians killed was carrying a gun, no warnings were given, and the troops were the first to open fire.
The civilians were shot dead during a civil rights march in Derry on 30 January 1972. Lord Saville, a Supreme Court judge, found there was no justification for the shooting. The first report into the shootings, by Lord Widgery in 1972, accused the marchers of firing weapons, and has since been discredited.

Prime Minister David Cameron issued a public apology on behalf of the British state. “What happened was both unjustified and unjustifiable. It was wrong,” he said.

The Northern Ireland director of public prosecutions, Sir Alasdair Fraser QC, is considering whether prosecutions for murder, perjury or perverting the course of justice could arise from the report.

Kingsley Napley partner Stephen Pollard, who represents some of the soldiers involved, said in an interview with the BBC, that “Saville’s conclusions fly in the face of the evidence”.

“He cherry-picked the evidence. Other than two instances, how does he know whose bullets killed the men? The evidence can be cut whichever way you want. The situation was confused.

“We’ve accepted that none of those who were killed or injured did anything to warrant their shooting. We accepted that right at the beginning of the report. What was at issue at the beginning of the investigation is the threat that the soldiers were facing.”

Pollard said that, after 12 years and £191m, Lord Saville “was under pressure” to “give very clear findings”.

 

Issue: 7422 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll