header-logo header-logo

Bloody Sunday Inquiry

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

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

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll