Missing Madeleine
Come join us...there's more inside you cannot see as a guest!

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Page 3 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:33

Consideration of the evidence relating to William John Dillon

33.40 Those who witnessed or appear to have witnessed the arrest of William John Dillon give varying and inconsistent accounts. Many suggest that the soldiers gave him a severe beating, including hitting him on the head or face with rifles, knocking him unconscious to the ground and dragging him away. We are not persuaded by these accounts. In his Keville interview William John Dillon did say that he was hit on the body with butts of rifles, kicked, hit with batons and threatened with being shot. Had he been assaulted in the way that some of these witnesses say, we are sure that not only would he have told Kathleen Keville at the time but also that he would have recalled such treatment when he came to give evidence to us. We take the view, particularly in the light of the evidence of William John Dillon himself, that the soldiers, while they undoubtedly assaulted him, did not do so to anything like the extent that these witnesses described.

33.41 Major Loden told us that he hit a man with his baton while attempting to arrest him.1We discuss this incident later in this report,2 where we consider whether the man might have been William John Dillon.

1 B2283.005 2Paragraphs 42.15–21

33.42 It is possible, though we are not sure, that Warrant Officer Class II Lewis, who is shown standing next to the command vehicle in the third of the photographs taken by Jeffrey Morris,1shouted at William John Dillon, but we accept his evidence that he did not draw his pistol.

1 Paragraph 33.13

33.43 It is also possible, on the basis of the accounts given by Noel McCartney (of the Derry Journal) and Ciaran Donnelly (of the Irish Times), that William John Dillon had thrown or was about to throw a stone before he was arrested. However, we are far from sure about this. Both these witnesses were south of the rubble barricade, about 100 yards from where William John Dillon was arrested, which was in the area of Pilot Row. Furthermore, as already noted, Private 006 told us that he did not see William John Dillon in possession of or throwing any missile.

33.44 Private 006 told us that he had arrested the youth because he thought he was a rioter or at least a threat as he was running towards the soldiers. We accept the evidence of this soldier that he believed this to be the case, and in our view he cannot fairly be criticised for making this arrest.

33.45 The arrest report form does not give rioting as the reason for the arrest, but instead records that William John Dillon had kicked a soldier and had been arrested by Private 037. As we have observed, Private 037 made a statement to the same effect. In view of Private 037’s oral evidence to this Inquiry, we do not accept that he had actually seen William John Dillon kick Private 006; and though we have little doubt that this youth had struggled to get away, and Private 037 may have thought that his colleague had been kicked, we find convincing what William John Dillon said to Kathleen Keville about not being able to get a kick in at this stage. A possible reason for Private 037 being recorded as having arrested William John Dillon for kicking Private 006, rather than Private 006 being recorded as having made the arrest on the grounds that the youth was rioting or believed to be a threat to soldiers, is that, as Private 006 told us, he was dyslexic and could not deal with paperwork, “so I preferred to avoid arresting people ”.1

1 B1377.001
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:35

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 34

The movement of other soldiers who disembarked from Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier in Rossville Street


Private 112

34.1 Private 112 was one of the two baton gunners we consider were in Sergeant O’s APC, the other being Private 017. His RMP statement1does not make clear where he went except that he was “deployed on the waste ground off Rossville St ” and that he later took up a position at the corner of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats.

1 B1730

34.2 Private 112 gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry. He told us that he was an alcoholic, that much of his memory was blurred and that a lot of the things had become “intermingled with other things that have happened on previous riots ”.1In his written evidence to us Private 112 said that he had arrested someone on the Eden Place waste ground.2According to an arrest statement3he made at Fort George on the evening of Bloody Sunday, Private 112 arrested Eamon McAteer. As we explain more fully later in this report,4we are sure that this was not so, as Eamon McAteer was arrested in Glenfada Park North. In his oral evidence Private 112 accepted that he might have made a mistake and identified the wrong prisoner as the one he had arrested.5

1 Day 320/86

2 B1732.004

3 We explain the processing of arrestees at Fort George later in this report (paragraphs 156.7–10).
4 Chapter 113

5 Day 320/100-101


34.3 Private 112 made no mention of arresting someone on the Eden Place waste ground in his RMP account. However, as will be seen, Private U described a soldier with a baton gun being involved with him in the arrest of a man who we are sure was Charles Canning. Since the other baton gunner, Private 017, was with Corporal P, it seems to us that the arrest with which Private 112 was concerned was that of Charles Canning, and though in his oral evidence he had no recollection of that arrest,1this in our view was probably due to his faulty memory. We deal with the arrest of Charles Canning in the next chapter of this report.2

1 Day 320/164-167 2Chapter 35

Private U

34.4 In his RMP statement timed at 0040 hours on 31st January 1972,1Private U described rioters throwing stones and bottles at the APC as it went into the Bogside. We have already considered his statement that at this time he heard automatic gunfire. He then stated that he cocked his rifle as he jumped out of the vehicle at the junction of Eden Place and Rossville Street. His RMP account continued:2

“About 15 yards up this junction was a man throwing stones at the vehicle. I ran towards him, he tried to run away but slipped and I arrested and detained him. I asked him his name and he told me it was Charles Collins. He also told me his address but I cannot remember it. I took Charles Collins back to an arrest vehicle which had moved up to the junction of Rossville Street and Eden Place. I handed him over to the Military Police. ”


1 B748 2B749

34.5 Private U then stated that he returned to the “roadside corner ” of the Rossville Flats.

34.6 In his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry1Private U told the Widgery Inquiry that when he jumped out of the APC he was with a soldier with a baton gun and was giving him protection. He described running towards the Rossville Flats, being hit by stones thrown by the crowd retreating in the direction of the forecourt of the flats, and that the baton gunner fired four or five rounds at the crowd. He stated that at this stage he saw a man in the crowd who threw a bottle at him, and that he chased the man. The man slipped and fell and “myself and the soldier I was with were able to catch him. I took this man back to the corner of William Street and Rossville Street. ”2Private U, in contrast to his RMP account, told the Widgery Inquiry in this statement that it was after this and as he went back along Rossville Street that he cocked his rifle. According to his statement to the Widgery Inquiry, when Private U reached Major Loden’s command vehicle at the north end of the Rossville Flats he decided not to go to his APC but instead took up position at the north end of Block 1 of those flats.

1 B766 2B767

34.7 In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Private U said that after he had got out of the APC the crowd threw stones and bottles and that two bottles and several stones hit him. He then said that he saw a man who “had just thrown a bottle, picked a stone up and was about to throw that at me ”. Private U, who said that the baton gunner was with him at this time, described arresting the man and taking him back to the “arresting point. ” He told the Widgery Inquiry that he did not cock his rifle at this stage but did so when he returned to Pilot Row. He then gave a similar account to that in his written statement of going back to the command vehicle and then to the corner of the Rossville Flats.1

1 WT13.95-96

34.8 Private U gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry.1We examine elsewhere in this report2the accounts that he gave us when we consider in more detail the circumstances of the arrest he made, the incoming shots that he said that he heard, and his account of firing his rifle.

1 B787.1; Day 369/2-206 2Chapter 35; paragraphs 49.43–47, 49.87, 53.13–14, 85.29–77 and 89.46–49
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:36

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 35

The arrest of Charles Canning

Chapter 35: The arrest of Charles Canning

35.1 Charles Canning made a NICRA statement1in which he described moving along with others towards the barricade at the flats when “the Para Regiment came driving past in Saracens ”. He continued:

“I first realised something was badly wrong when I heard and saw them shooting from the windows as they came past us. At the front of the flats they drove in straight in front of us and straight at some other people who were making for the rear courtyard of the flats. When I advanced towards the flats I saw the paras leaping from the back of the Saracens and proceed to shoot, baton and kick anyone who tried to get out of their way. The man directly in front of me was beaten to the ground so I decided to try and make a run to get past the barricade. It was then I noticed two paras one of which was armed with an SLR and he was firing shots towards the people at the barricade. When these two saw me they ran towards me shouting.

At this point I was suffering from the effects of the gas and I could not run very well. I thought the para was going to shoot me so I dived onto the ground. The two paras then ran towards me and kicked me until I got up off the ground and went off with them to a Saracen. When I arrived there some more paras were there with a youth they were abusing, but when I arrived they stopped and helped my captors to assault me.

It was at this point when one of the paras, the one who was shooting towards the barricade earlier, hit me in the face with the foresight of the rifle. ”


1 AC25.5

35.2 In his written evidence to this Inquiry1Charles Canning described seeing paratroopers “pointing their SLRs out of the slots in the sides of the Pigs and shooting indiscriminately ”. Although others gave similar accounts of this, we are sure on our assessment of the whole of the available evidence, that it did not happen.2Charles Canning then described the circumstances of his arrest in the following terms:

“14. As I was making my way towards the Rubble Barricade in Rossville Street a para in the vicinity of Glenfada Park North saw me and started to run towards me with an SLR. There was also a soldier running after me from behind with a baton gun. I fell to the floor and the para chasing me from behind caught up with me. Both paras arrested me somewhere in front of Block 1 of Rossville Flats, approximately at point H on the attached map (grid reference K14). The para carrying the SLR kept threatening to shoot me although I cannot recall his precise threats. Other paras were shooting all over the place.

15. Both paras had Liverpudlian accents. The para carrying the SLR was small and of average build.

16. Some pigs were parked in Rossville Street, one at approximately the point marked I (grid reference L11) and one at approximately the point marked J (grid reference M10). There may have been more. I am unsure of their positions. The paras then took me to one of the Pigs parked in Rossville Street, I can’t remember if it was the one at point I or point J. I kept wondering to myself how could I get out of the situation.

17. As I approached the Pig approximately six soldiers started kicking into me and I remember seeing a man lying in the back of the Pig who I now think was Jim Doherty. I did not say anything to him at the time. I kept thinking to myself that I had to stay on my feet while the paras were kicking me, otherwise they would kill me. ”

1 AC25.2
2 Leslie Bedell (AB28.3; WT5.22; WT5.31), Philip McGuinness (AM469.2; Day 138/182-184),
Eamon Melaugh (AM397.3; AM397.22; Day 143/25-29)


35.3 The positions of the two Armoured Personnel Carriers (APCs), as marked by Charles Canning, were by the entrance to Eden Place and further north on the west side of Rossville Street, respectively.

35.4 In neither his NICRA statement nor his written evidence to this Inquiry did Charles Canning record that he was put into as opposed to being taken to an APC.

35.5 Charles Canning was called to give oral evidence to this Inquiry.1He told us that he did not wish either to be sworn or to be affirmed, but despite being asked, gave no reason for this. It soon became apparent that he had no intention of trying to help this Inquiry but instead adopted a wholly obstructive attitude. This he maintained despite a request from counsel acting for the majority of the families of those who died on Bloody Sunday to reconsider his attitude. The Tribunal accordingly told Charles Canning to leave the witness stand.

1 Day 417/159-165

35.6 In the previous chapter1we referred to the accounts that Private U gave at the time of the person he arrested. According to his first Royal Military Police (RMP) account2 the person he arrested was a man who was throwing stones at the vehicle from about 15 yards up the Eden Place roadway, and who tried to run away but slipped and fell over as Private U ran towards him. According to his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry3the man, who was in a crowd, threw a bottle at him. According to his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry4the man had just thrown a bottle, and had then picked up a stone and was about to throw it at him. Private U told the Widgery Inquiry that a baton gunner was with him.

1 Paragraphs 34.4–7

2 B749
3 B766

4 WT13.95-97


35.7 In his written evidence to this Inquiry, Private U stated that he recalled arresting a man who had thrown something at him. He added: “The man was thrashing and kicking and I had to subdue him with my weapon. I then started to take him back towards the Pigs. ”1

1 B787.004

35.8 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Private U identified himself as the soldier standing beside Charles Canning in a photograph taken at Fort George.1

1 Day 369/37

35.9 Private U explained that what he meant by subduing the man with his weapon was that he would have hit him with the stock of his rifle, though he could not recall where he had hit him or how many times. He said that he might also have used what he called a wristlock. He said that he had no recollection of kicking Charles Canning when he was on the ground, of hitting Charles Canning in the face with the foresight of his rifle, or of threatening to shoot him.1

1 Day 369/40-41

35.10 In the arrest report form prepared at Fort George, Private 112 is named as a witness to the arrest of Charles Canning. In his written statement to this Inquiry Private 112 described how, after disembarking from his vehicle on the waste ground, he arrested a youngish man who was part of a crowd of suspected rioters. “I grabbed him and I hit him with my baton gun to subdue him. I aimed a blow at his shoulder, but I think I actually hit him partly on the head and partly on the shoulder. I then took him to one of the Pigs ... ”1In his oral evidence to this Inquiry he said that he hit the man with the barrel of his baton gun but he could not recall what, if anything, he had seen the arrested man doing before his arrest.2

1 B1732.004 2Day 320/99-100
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:37

35.11 In our view both Private 112 and Private U took part in the arrest of Charles Canning.

35.12 Though it is possible, we are not sure whether either Private U or Private 112 actually saw Charles Canning throwing anything at the soldiers. As already noted, the accounts that Private U gave at the time varied from chasing a man throwing stones at a vehicle, seeing a man who had thrown a bottle at him, and seeing a man who had just thrown a bottle and who was about to throw a stone. Charles Canning said nothing in his statements about throwing anything at the vehicles or at soldiers, and for the reasons given above, we were not able to explore this matter with him.

35.13 In his NICRA statement Charles Canning said that the soldiers kicked him as he lay on the ground. He said nothing in that statement or in his written evidence to this Inquiry about being hit by either a baton gun or a rifle at this stage, though he did say that soldiers assaulted him when he got to the Saracen and, in his NICRA statement, that a soldier hit him in the face with the foresight of his rifle. In contrast, both Private U and Private 112 have described using their weapons to “subdue ” Charles Canning as they arrested him.

35.14 James Charles Doherty was also arrested on the waste ground. We consider the circumstances of that arrest later in this report.1However, in his written statement to this Inquiry2he told us that after he had himself been arrested he was thrown into an Army vehicle on Rossville Street. A number of soldiers inside the vehicle kicked and punched him, and one of them head-butted him with the visor of his helmet. Then Charles Canning was thrown into the vehicle; he was making provocative remarks to the soldiers and received as bad a beating as James Charles Doherty.

1 Chapter 42 2AD69.3

35.15 In his NICRA account1 James Charles Doherty stated, seemingly referring to Charles Canning, that “Another man about my age was dragged in with his face covered with blood. A soldier kept hitting him across the face, butting him with his helmet – and bruising and cutting his mouth and nose. ” In his Keville interview2 James Charles Doherty said: “The fella that was sitting beside me, the little fella that got on after me, he was all busted up in the mouth you know. Your man kept hitting him with his helmet … his head. He’s hitting him, he’s saying ‘you’re, you’re the bastard who tried to shoot me … you are a bastard who tried to shoot me. I’ll get you’. ” In his written statement to this Inquiry3 James Charles Doherty told us that Charles Canning’s face had been bleeding when he was put into the vehicle, as he had recorded in his NICRA statement.

1 AD69.15 3AD69.7

2 AD69.19

35.16 As will have been observed, the evidence about what the soldiers did when they arrested Charles Canning is confused and conflicting. On the basis of Charles Canning’s NICRA statement, it could be suggested that he was not hit or hit significantly with a weapon until he reached the vehicle, though he did record1 that he was “badly treated ” by the paratroopers while in their custody. At the same time, it is also right to be cautious about the account that Charles Canning gave to NICRA. For example, he recorded in this statement that he had seen soldiers firing from the vehicles as they came in, and that a soldier had fired shots towards the rubble barricade before arresting him. In our view neither of these assertions was correct. Nevertheless, in the light of the account given at the time by James Charles Doherty, it seems to us that by the stage Charles Canning had reached the Army vehicle, he had sustained an injury to his head or face that caused him to bleed.

1 AC25.5

35.17 Despite the accounts of James Charles Doherty, we remain in doubt whether Charles Canning was put into the vehicle to which he was first taken, since Charles Canning recorded nothing to that effect in either his NICRA statement or his written statement to this Inquiry.

35.18 In his first Royal Military Police (RMP) account Private U had stated that he took his arrestee back to an arrest vehicle near Eden Place and handed him over to the military police,1 in his evidence to the Widgery Inquiry he said that he had taken him back to the corner of Rossville Street and William Street, which was an “arresting point ”, and there handed him over to other soldiers.2 In his written evidence to this Inquiry3 Private U stated that his current recollection was that he took the civilian he had arrested to a vehicle and not as far north as the junction of William Street and Rossville Street. “I think I may have been confused when making reference to that position. ”

1 B749 3B787.010

2 B767; WT13.96

35.19 During the course of Private U’s oral evidence to this Inquiry,1 counsel for the majority of the families drew Private U’s attention to a clip from the ABC film,2 which shows a civilian being taken north by a soldier along Rossville Street from the direction of Army vehicles on that street. The civilian might be Charles Canning, though the film is not clear enough to distinguish his features. A photograph taken on the evening of Bloody Sunday at Fort George shows that Private U and Charles Canning were about the same height, whereas on one view the soldier seen in the film could be somewhat shorter than the civilian he was escorting. Private U was unable to say whether he was the soldier in the film.

1 Day 369/135-136 2Vid 48 12.37

35.20 Private U was shown this film clip in the context of a suggestion, which we do not accept, that he had not arrested Charles Canning on the Eden Place waste ground, but simply picked him out as a rioter later at Fort George.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:37

35.21 Private U described the vehicle in his RMP statement1 as an “arrest vehicle ” at which military police were present, and asserted in the same statement2 that he was later “recalled to the arrest vehicle to identify the rioter I had arrested earlier ”. These aspects of Private U’s evidence suggest that the vehicle is likely to have been one of the Land Rovers under the command of the Regimental Sergeant Major (RSM), Warrant Officer Class I INQ 2037, which had moved forward to the junction of William Street and Rossville Street.3 The RSM’s arrest team included members of the RMP.4 In his statement for the Widgery Inquiry,5 Private U recorded that after handing over the man he had arrested he made his way back down Rossville Street and reached the north end of the Rossville Flats.

1 B749 4ED49.6

2 B750 5B767

3 C2037.3

35.22 Although the matter is not entirely clear, it seems to us that what probably happened is that Charles Canning was initially taken to an APC on Rossville Street. It is possible, but far from certain, that he was put in this APC for a short while, after which he was escorted by Private U along Rossville Street to an RMP vehicle parked further north. Private U returned and went to the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats. Thus we consider that the BBC film clip probably does show Private U escorting Charles Canning.

35.23 In our view Private U and Private 112 did, as they told us, use their weapons to hit Charles Canning. According to Private 112, his blow, though aimed at the shoulder, may have hit Charles Canning on the head. James Charles Doherty’s account is to the effect that Charles Canning had received a head or face wound before he reached the APC. This may have been the blow with Private 112’s baton gun or it may have been, as Charles Canning described in his NICRA statement, a rifle blow from Private U. Since Charles Canning chose not to avail himself of the opportunity to assist the Tribunal when he came to give oral evidence, we remain unsure whether Charles Canning was assaulted when he got to the APC or whether he was put in that vehicle and then further assaulted. If either of these assaults did occur, there is nothing to suggest that there was any justification for them.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:38


Chapter 36: Summary of the movements of the soldiers who disembarked from Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier in Rossville Street


36.1 On the basis of the evidence discussed above, it appears that Corporal P and Private 017 moved across Rossville Street towards Kells Walk. What they said they then saw and did is considered below in the context of the events of Sector 3.1Private R ran towards where Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) had stopped in the car park of the Rossville Flats. Private 006 arrested William John Dillon, probably on the Eden Place waste ground just south of Pilot Row, and after taking his prisoner to a vehicle on Rossville Street, went towards Sergeant O’s APC. Private U appears to have chased and arrested Charles Canning somewhere in the area of Eden Place and Pilot Row, taken this man back to an APC on Rossville Street and then escorted him to a Royal Military Police vehicle at the corner of William Street and Rossville Street; after which he made his way to the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats. In making this arrest it seems to us that Private U was accompanied by Private 112, a baton gunner, and though it is not entirely clear it seems to us likely that these two were close to each other as they went forward to the north corner of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats.

1 Paragraphs 69.20–58 and 71.1–10; Chapters 73–75
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:46

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 37



The remaining soldiers in Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier

Chapter 37: The remaining soldiers in Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier



37.1 After six soldiers had disembarked from Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) in Rossville Street, this vehicle turned left into the entrance to the car park and there stopped. For the reasons given earlier in our consideration of the events in Sector 2,1it seems probable that there were only three soldiers still in the vehicle at this stage, namely Sergeant O, Private T and Private INQ 1579.

1 Paragraphs 24.5–18

37.2 One of the photographs taken by Derrik Tucker Senior from Block 2 of the Rossville Flats shows the line of vehicles that followed the two APCs into the Bogside. Just visible is the front of Sergeant O’s APC as it was about to enter the car park.



37.3 Colman Doyle, the Irish Press photographer, took four photographs from the Eden Place waste ground, before he took the photographs of William John Dillon, Duncan Clark and Charles McMonagle, to which we have already referred. In his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry,1he explained that these were taken in the order in which they appear below. He told the Widgery Inquiry that the first photograph “was taken from the waste ground between Pilot Row and Eden Place towards the corner between the western and southern blocks of Rossville flats. Almost immediately before the picture was taken army vehicles had come into Rossville Street and soldiers emerged and fired rubber bullets at people walking down Rossville Street and the waste ground adjoining. The volley of rubber bullets was heavy and I distinctly heard the sharp crack of rifle shots intermingled with the rubber bullet firing. As can be seen soldiers were running after people to make arrests. ” He told the Widgery Inquiry that he took the next three photographs in quick succession. In his evidence to us he explained that he was using a motorised camera and that there would have been an interval of less than a second between the photographs.2

1 M23.1 2Day 72/78





avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:47



37.4 The photographs show Sergeant O’s APC, and also give a view of what was happening after it had come into the car park. We should note at this point that we have been unable to identify any of the civilians or soldiers shown in these photographs. We should also note that although it was submitted that the photographs show unjustified violent assaults by soldiers, particularly the soldier shown on the left,1we are not persuaded that they do so. Although in his evidence to the Widgery Inquiry Colman Doyle stated that “The soldier on the left appears to be attacking a man who is wearing a handkerchief on his face and photographs 3 and 4 seem to show that he knocked him out ”,2in his oral evidence to this Inquiry he recalled that the soldier “just jumped over that man, he did not fire or anything … and I think the man may just have tripped ” and that the soldier seen on the right of the photographs was “just making arrest ”.3

1 FS1.1324 3Day 72/77

2 M23.1

37.5 Fulvio Grimaldi, an Italian photojournalist who was present on Bloody Sunday, mistakenly believed that he had taken these photographs and gave evidence as to what he said they showed. Since we are sure that he was not the photographer, we do not find this evidence helpful.1

1 M34.57; Day 131/21-25; Day 131/151-152; Day 131/157-160

37.6 As will have been noted, Colman Doyle told the Widgery Inquiry that at the time he took these photographs he heard the crack of rifle fire as well as a lot of rubber bullets. He said the same to the Widgery Inquiry in his oral evidence.1In his oral evidence to the present Inquiry, he said that this was wrong and he had not heard live fire at this time: “if I felt that – at that stage that there were live rounds being fired, I would have been a lot more cautious than I was. ”2However, in view of the written and oral evidence that he gave at the time, we consider that Colman Doyle may have heard some live rifle fire at this stage. If he did, then it was probably the shots fired up the Eden Place alleyway by Lieutenant N, which we have described in an earlier chapter3and which were discharged soon after the APCs had arrived. It is also possible, but in our view less likely, that he heard the first shots fired by Corporal P, which we discuss later in this report.4

1 WT7.53 3Paragraphs 30.36–129

2 Day 72/136-137; Day 72/156-158 4Chapter 73

37.7 The position of Sergeant O’s APC in the car park is also shown in the following photograph, taken by amateur photographer Sam Gillespie,1which gives a view looking north from the car park, though this photograph was taken some time after those shown above.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:47




Sergeant O

37.8 In his first RMP statement timed at 2130 hours on 30th January 1972,1Sergeant O did not record where his APC had stopped, but simply stated: “We managed to separate a section of about 200 strong in the flat’s car park in the Rossville Flats area. This was achieved by two Humbers [APCs] of which mine was one. We all debussed to make arrests. 6 arrests were made. ” Sergeant O then described hearing firing and seeing bullets strike, evidence which we consider later in this report.2We also consider later3two further statements that he made to the Royal Military Police (RMP).4

1 B439-440 3Paragraphs 51.209 and 51.214

2 Paragraphs 49.57–74 and 53.15–20 4B461; B464

37.9 In his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry,1Sergeant O described how his APC had gone beyond that of Lieutenant N and into the car park of the Rossville Flats, stopping between 36 Chamberlain Street (the southernmost house on the side of Chamberlain Street that backed onto the Eden Place waste ground) and the “gable end ” (the north end) of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats. “In this way we cut off between us a group of about 200 people. These were intended as the people the snatch squads would go into. ”

1 B466

37.10 Sergeant O then stated that at first he and his men faced away from the Rossville Flats into the area in which they were to make their snatches. He told the Widgery Inquiry that he did not know at this time that his Platoon Commander had been hit on the head and was out of action for a time. This seems to be a reference to Lieutenant N’s altercation with a man who then ran away. Having stated that his soldiers did not need orders as they were acting “in accordance with the drill ”, he continued:1

“My original intention when I got out of the pig was to stay by it, keep an eye on the snatch squad and keep a look out in the direction of the buildings being prepared to cover the squads in the event of any shooting. However a man threw an empty bottle at me. I arrested him and passed him to one of the lance-corporals to put in the pig. ”


1 B466-467

37.11 Sergeant O then stated that as he was following the Lance Corporal and the arrestee back to the APC facing the flats there was a burst of firing.1We consider this part of Sergeant O’s evidence later in this report,2when considering his own firing.

1 B467 2Paragraphs 51.208–265

37.12 In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Sergeant O said he had been in the front seat next to the driver and that when they reached the car park he got out but his driver remained in the APC.1He was asked about the state of the crowd at the time he made this arrest:2

“Q. How would you estimate the crowd at that time?

A. Initially when we moved in the Platoon Commander and vehicle force followed in and we cordoned off, the two vehicles, a group of about 200. Some of them went back towards Eden Place and out round that way. The remainder split and came into the car park of the Rossville Flats going on either side of my vehicle. The vehicle was actually sitting in the middle of the crowd when we de-bussed.

Q. Originally, you cordoned off about 200 who spread out in the two directions?

A. Yes.

Q. How long was the crowd still visible from there?

A. The actual 200 itself cleared within a matter of seconds, ten or fifteen or twenty seconds, that sort of thing. They had gone from where we had trapped them. They were still moving across the car park into the Rossville Flats area.

Q. Did you see any part of the crowd trying to scramble through the alleyways in the corner of the buildings, in the courtyard?

A. They were cutting across the car park and splitting up into these alleyways. This is where they were going to. ”


1 B473-474 2B475

37.13 Sergeant O was then asked about the firing that he said he had observed and his own firing.

37.14 Sergeant O gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry. In his written statement1he gave much the same account of driving into the car park and of arresting a civilian as he had in his earlier accounts. He told us that:2

“As I got out of the Pig I realised that we were right underneath the three Blocks of the Rossville Flats and I thought to myself that this was not where I wanted to be. I would have much preferred to have been about 50 yards north of this location and closer to Lieutenant N’s Pig which had stopped on the waste ground. I thought that my men would be more vulnerable to being shot at from this forward position right next to the Rossville Flats, but it did not make a huge difference to our arrest operation: we just got out of the Pigs and got on with it. ”


1 B575.107 2B575.112

37.15 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, he was asked about an interview (probably conducted by Neil Davies in 1989)1in which he had said that when he was escorting the person he had arrested back to his APC, he was armed only with a baton. Sergeant O said that this was wrong, but denied that he was trying to give a false impression to the journalist.2

1 Day 397/45-60 2Day 336/15-16

37.16 We deal in more detail a little later in this report1with the arrest made by Sergeant O.

1 Chapters 40 and 43

Private T

37.17 In his RMP statement timed at 0200 hours on 31st January 1972,1Private T gave the following account:

“My APC halted to the east of the northernmost block of Rossville Flats. We had outflanked a large proportion of the rioters and I assisted in making two arrests. I then moved back to my APC in the forecourt of Rossville Flats.

When I rejoined the troops there they were under a heavy stoning attack from all the three blocks of flats. As I was in cover I became aware of people on the balconies of the flats dropping bottles and other missiles from the verandahs into our position.

I noticed that the bottles contained a liquid and I thought they were petrol bombs. However, none of the bottles was alight and none went on fire when they smashed. After a couple had broken as they fell I smelt a strong acid smell and realised that the bottles contained acid. ”


1 B725

37.18 Private T then gave an account of being ordered to fire at whoever was dropping the acid bombs. We deal with this aspect of his evidence later in this report.1

1 Paragraphs 51.266–282

37.19 In his written statement for and oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Private T gave a similar account,1though he added that at or about the time he was helping with arrests he heard a burst of low velocity fire, another matter we return to later in this report.2

1 B734-736; WT13.86-94 2Paragraphs 49.75–78

37.20 Private T is dead and gave no evidence to this Inquiry.

Private INQ 1579

37.21 Private INQ 1579 was the driver of Sergeant O’s APC. He gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry. He appears to have given no evidence in 1972 and told us that he had not done so. In his written statement to this Inquiry, he also told us that he now had very little recall of what happened on Bloody Sunday.1However, he did say to us that the people he and Sergeant O drove through were picking up bricks and throwing them at the APC: “the missiles started to rain down upon us. ”2

1 C1579.1 2Day 336/154

37.22 Private INQ 1579 told this Inquiry that soon after he had brought the vehicle to a halt in the car park he disembarked and cocked his rifle, after which he went to the back of the vehicle.1He said missiles were being thrown from the flats though he could not recall actually seeing people throwing them. He also said that he saw no petrol bombs being thrown.2

1 C1581.4; Day 336/165 2Day 336/167-168

37.23 Private INQ 1579 gave some evidence about firing, which we consider later in this report.1

1 Paragraphs 49.80–81 and 49.92

37.24 Two civilian witnesses have given evidence that they were struck by Sergeant O’s APC as it came into the car park. They are Alana Burke and Thomas Harkin.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:49

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 38

The incident concerning Alana Burke

Chapter 38: The incident concerning Alana Burke

38.1 Alana Burke, who was 18 at the time, was interviewed by BBC Radio in Altnagelvin Hospital on 2nd February 1972. The following is a transcript of what she said:1

“A. The first thing I knew, the, the dye came up and hit me. I was soaked to the skin and began to run. And then I was overcome by gas. I run towards Rossville Street behind the big flats. I looked round and the saracen tanks came from everywhere. I couldn’t run fast enough so I grabbed a, I don’t know who it was, some fella, I held onto his tie and he dragged me off Rossville Street. Then I looked behind me and I saw Saracen tanks were coming from both ways and one of them came up and the soldiers got out and batoned old man to the ground. And I ran up against a wall and the Saracen pinned me to the wall and that’s all I remember and I had my back to the tank and I seen it coming and I couldn’t run fast enough. And it just got me right in the back. ”


1 X2.3.10

38.2 Alana Burke later made a NICRA statement dated 16th February 1972. In it she described approaching Barrier 14 with the marchers and being soaked with purple dye and overcome with CS gas. She decided to go home and as she was going along Rossville Street she heard someone shout that the soldiers were coming. Her statement continued:1

“I glanced backwards and saw an armoured car coming into the car park. It was going fast and stopped a few yards away from me. Some soldiers got out and I saw one of them strike an elderly man on the face with the butt of his rifle.

The soldier got back into the saracen again and it moved forward towards me. It struck me on the right side of my back and my right leg. What exactly happened next I can’t remember, but I do recall being pinned against the wall by the crowd who were all trying to escape through the alleyway leading underneath the flats. I crawled on all fours through the alleyway and eventually a man called Frank Campbell, a youth club leader took me to one of the maisonettes in Joseph Place.

About an hour later I was taken to Altnagelvin hospital by ambulance. After a few days, during which I was under the care of Mr Fenton, I was discharged. ”


1 AB101.8

38.3 Alana Burke gave a similar account in a written statement for the Widgery Inquiry, but she did not give oral evidence to that Inquiry.1

1 AB101.6

38.4 In the Evening News newspaper on 1st February 1972 and in the Irish News on 2nd February 1972, it was reported that Alana Burke had said that she could not say whether she had been deliberately run down.1

1 L94; L139

38.5 Jimmy McGovern interviewed Alana Burke in or around 1999 or 2000, in the course of research for a drama documentary about Bloody Sunday. During this interview she recalled seeing the Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) coming and feeling a bang but said that otherwise she could not remember.1

1 AB101.13

38.6 Alana Burke gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry. She told us that Lorney McMonagle tried to pull her out of the way as “the Saracens had started to come in to the waste ground and to the car park and when he let me go that was it, I was on me own more or less ”.1She agreed that her basic recollection was that he pulled her along but let go and then a Saracen hit her. The Inquiry did not obtain any evidence from Lorney McMonagle.

1 Day 76/83

38.7 In the course of her oral evidence, Alana Burke marked with a red arrow where she recalled that she was when she was hit on her right side by an APC.1

1 Day 76/83-84; AB101.9


38.8 Alana Burke described the man she saw hit with a rifle as being on Pilot Row and as being shortish and about sixtyish in age. She was shown a photograph of William John Doherty (one of those arrested on the Eden Place waste ground) but when she was told (correctly) that this person was nearly six feet tall, agreed that it was unlikely to have been him.1

1 AB101.4; Day 76/79-81; Day 76/98

38.9 When her attention was drawn to one of the newspapers to which we have referred above, which had reported her as saying that she could not say whether the APC had deliberately run her down, her answer was “I was there, how did he not see me? ”1When she was shown the transcript of her BBC interview she told us that she did not mean that the Saracen had pinned her to the wall, but that this was the garage wall where she ended up.2

1 Day 76/102 2Day 76/104-105

38.10 Alana Burke gave us a description of how she was helped through the alleyway between Blocks 1 and 2 of the Rossville Flats to a house in Joseph Place (which was to the south of the flats) and then taken by ambulance to Altnagelvin Hospital.1She was discharged from hospital on 2nd February 1972.2Alana Burke told us that she had sustained injuries to her pelvis, right leg and back, from which she took six months to recover and which have had continuing serious medical consequences for her.3

1 AB101.2 3AB101.2

2 AB101.7

38.11 It was suggested that there was further civilian evidence that was relevant to the circumstances in which Alana Burke was hit, as we are sure that she was, by an APC.1

1 FS1.1111; FS7.124

38.12 We have considered the account given by Frank Campbell to this Inquiry of seeing her deliberately run down,1but we are not persuaded that he was a witness to this, as in his interview with Kathleen Keville he had merely said that he had met a young girl who had told him “she had been squashed by the saracen ”.2Alana Burke’s own evidence was that it was while she was on the Eden Place waste ground that Frank Campbell shouted to her that the Army were coming in and that she should run. As she ran a Saracen hit her. After she had been hit, a girl helped her to the alleyway between Blocks 1 and 2. Frank Campbell then carried her from the alleyway to a maisonette in Joseph Place.3Furthermore, Frank Campbell’s evidence of seeing numbers of Saracens driving round in circles and apparently trying to hit people4is, from the evidence discussed in this report, something that simply did not happen.

1 AC137.3; Day 121/9-22; Day 121/27-28; Day 121/36-39

2 AC137.11; AC137.13
3 AB101.1

4 Day 121/7-8


38.13 Anthony Harkin described seeing a girl wearing a bright red coat hit at a point midway between Eden Place and Pilot Row.1However, we are sure that Alana Burke was hit at about the entrance to the car park and that she was wearing a brown coat.2We do not find his evidence helpful.

1 AH11.3 2Day 76/97

38.14 We are sure that Alana Burke was hit by the APC that was driven into the car park.

38.15 We have referred in the previous chapter1to some of the evidence of the driver of that APC, Private INQ 1579. His evidence to this Inquiry was that he had no recollection of knocking down a young woman and was certain that if he had hit someone he would have felt the impact, though he did tell us that his vehicle hit a man just as the vehicle was stopping and that he had heard no impact from that.2 That man was Thomas Harkin and we examine in the next chapter3 the circumstances in which he was hit.4 Private INQ 1579 said that there was no deliberate policy of running people down, and that while rioters might escape, “you would rather lose the target than injure people unnecessarily ”.5 Sergeant O, who was in the APC until it stopped in the car park, also said that he had no recollection of his APC knocking anyone down.6

1 Paragraphs 37.21–23

2 Day 336/177

3 Chapter 39
4 C1579.3; Day 336/159; AH106.2

5 Day 336/163-164

6 B575.111


38.16 It appears from the photograph showing Sergeant O’s APC in Rossville Street1that there may have been some protective plating on the driver’s door. If so, this would have restricted the driver’s view on that side.2

1 Paragraph 24.24 2Day 336/157

38.17 From Alana Burke’s account we have no doubt that she was hit by the APC after Sergeant O’s APC had briefly stopped on Rossville Street. Her NICRA statement suggests that this was the case.1Thus the vehicle is unlikely to have been travelling particularly fast as it came into the car park, since we accept Private INQ 1579’s evidence that such a heavy vehicle took some time to speed up.2William Harley, whose evidence we consider a little later in this report,3told us that it was about right to describe the speed of this vehicle when it came into the car park as faster than a man could run, but not much faster.4

1 AB101.8

2 Day 336/153-154
3 Paragraphs 39.12–16

4 Day 77/46-47


38.18 There is, however, an odd feature of Alana Burke’s evidence. She has consistently maintained in the accounts she has given that she witnessed an elderly man being hit in the face with a rifle butt by a soldier before she was herself hit by the APC. We have no evidence apart from hers of such an incident, though there is a body of evidence from others, which we consider later in this report,1that William John Doherty, a man of 55, was arrested and hit with a rifle after the APC had come to a stop in the car park and Sergeant O had got out.

1 Chapter 40

38.19 Although Alana Burke thought that the person she saw being hit was not William John Doherty because of his height, we bear in mind that while she has always described the man she saw as elderly it was not until she gave evidence to this Inquiry that she expressed a recollection that he was “shortish ”.

38.20 We do not find it surprising, in view of the speed of events, that some witnesses have muddled the sequence in which they occurred. In the case of Alana Burke, there was not only the factor of fast-moving events, but also the fact that she had been affected by purple dye and CS gas, was running clearly terrified from the soldiers coming in and was then knocked over and injured by one of their vehicles. Given these considerations, and the fact that although there were many civilians in the area at the time, no-one else appears to have seen an elderly man being hit by a soldier before Sergeant O’s APC stopped in the car park; and given also the fact that, except as to timing, her account is similar to that of other witnesses to the arrest of William John Doherty, we consider that it is more likely than not that it was he whom Alana Burke saw; and that in her various accounts she got the sequence of events wrong.

Consideration of the evidence relating to Alana Burke

38.21 There remains the question as to whether Private INQ 1579 can be criticised for what happened. On our assessment of his evidence he probably neither saw Alana Burke nor realised that he had hit someone. We also accept his denial that he deliberately drove into people. In all the circumstances we are of the view that Private INQ 1579 cannot fairly be criticised for failing to exercise due care when driving his APC into the car park.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:50

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 39

The incident concerning Thomas Harkin

Chapter 39: The incident concerning Thomas Harkin

39.1 Thomas Harkin was 32 at the time of Bloody Sunday. He gave no evidence in 1972, but did give written and oral evidence to this Inquiry.

39.2 In his written statement to this Inquiry,1 Thomas Harkin told us that he had come into the car park through the gap between Block 1 and Block 2 of the Rossville Flats with his friend James Quinn and was there when two “Saracens ” entered the car park area, one of which came up behind him and hit him, knocking him to the ground. According to Thomas Harkin, the vehicle was then going to reverse over him but James Quinn pulled him out of the way. Thomas Harkin said that the vehicle must have had spikes on it because he had spike holes in the back of his legs. He also sustained cuts and bruises to his face when he fell to the ground, such that he had trouble opening his eyes. According to this account the vehicle stopped with its front end pointing north towards William Street. Two soldiers disembarked from the back of the vehicle. One approached James Quinn and Thomas Harkin and attempted to strike James Quinn with the butt of his rifle, but James Quinn darted out of the way and the blow hit Thomas Harkin in the stomach.

1 AH106.2

39.3 In this statement Thomas Harkin told us that he then ran through the passage between Blocks 1 and 2 of the Rossville Flats, heading towards Free Derry Corner, dropped to the ground in Rossville Street when he heard shooting, lay there for about ten minutes, and then carried on via Lecky Road and Westland Street to his home in Dove Park.1

1 AH106.2

39.4 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Thomas Harkin maintained that two vehicles had come into the car park. Thomas Harkin said that he and James Quinn decided to throw stones at the Army vehicles when they came into the car park but that he had not thrown or picked up any stones before he was hit. He said that the spikes made two or three holes below his knee. He told us that he did not require medical treatment for his injuries.1

1 Day 113/141-143

39.5 Thomas Harkin also told us, on being shown the statement of James Quinn (to which we refer below) that it was possible that, contrary to his written statement, he had come into the car park with James Quinn from the Eden Place waste ground.1He also agreed that they had been standing right by the entrance to the stairwell at the car park side of the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats before the Army vehicles came in.2

1 Day 113/144-145 2Day 113/146

39.6 Although in his written evidence Thomas Harkin had put the position where he was hit as close to the alleyway between Blocks 1 and 2 of the Rossville Flats,1in his oral evidence he accepted that it was possible that the vehicle had not come so far in and that he had been hit somewhere in the mouth of the car park after having run out from a position close to Block 1:2“It is possible, I just do not remember exactly. The information I gave was what I could remember at the time I made it, which was a couple of months ago. ”

1 AH106.2 2Day 113/149-150

39.7 Thomas Harkin told us that he could not remember whether the soldiers he said had run towards him and James Quinn had come from the vehicle that had hit him or from the other vehicle.1He also said that he did not agree that the soldier had hit him in the face, as James Quinn had recorded in his statement.2

1 Day 113/150 2Day 113/152

39.8 James Quinn also gave no evidence in 1972, but did give written and oral evidence to this Inquiry.

39.9 In his written statement to this Inquiry,1 James Quinn told us that he had been throwing stones at Barrier 12. He later met Thomas Harkin. They were standing tight up against the north-east corner of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats, intending to throw stones at the Army vehicles when they arrived. One vehicle entered the car park and swung round in a clockwise direction. To James Quinn’s surprise, the vehicle stopped and soldiers began to disembark from it. Thomas Harkin then panicked and ran out towards the centre of the car park. A second vehicle then entered the car park and swung round, and its bumper hit Thomas Harkin and threw him into the air. Thomas Harkin ended up lying in an icy puddle. James Quinn ran out to help him. As he attempted to lift him, a soldier arrived and tried to hit James Quinn on the head with his rifle butt, but James Quinn slipped on the ice and the blow hit Thomas Harkin full in the face. James Quinn then stated that he told Thomas Harkin “you’re on your own now ”2 and made a run for it.

1 AQ10.3 2AQ10.4

39.10 In his oral evidence1 James Quinn said that the running down appeared to him deliberate, but accepted that he could not say what was in the mind of the driver of the vehicle. Indeed he accepted that it was possible that he had not actually seen the collision and that his attention had been distracted at the relevant moment.2 He also acknowledged that he was not sure that the rifle butt had hit Thomas Harkin in the face as opposed to the stomach:3“I could not say where he was hit. ”

1 Day 179/47-48 3Day 179/52-53

2 Day 179/84-85

39.11 Two other witnesses gave accounts in 1972 that relate to a man knocked down by an Army vehicle in the area of the car park.

39.12 William Harley, who was 36 at the time, made a NICRA statement dated 2nd February 1972.1He stated that he was watching from his home at 37 Donagh Place. This flat was on the centre of the top floor of Block 2 of the Rossville Flats, giving him from his bedroom window, as he said, “a clear view of Chamberlain St., the William St. end of Rossville St. and the wasteground between ”. He described when he first saw the soldiers:

“The soldiers I saw came up William St. from the direction of the barricade. One armoured personnel carrier turned into Chamberlain St. and came to a halt at the bottom of Harvey St. Three more armoured personnell carriers and two canvas covered lorries turned into Rossville St. The lorries were parked on the footpath, one on each side of the street about twenty five yards from the William St. corner. The three armoured cars came across Rossville St. and two of them came to a halt at the gable end of the Rossville St. flats (William St. end). The third car drove past these two and entered the car park driving straight towards the people who were running in every direction trying to escape. One man was knocked down by this car (At this time there was a crowd of several hundred people running in panic). As the man was attempting to rise, a soldier ran from the back of the car which was now stationary and raised his rifle in an attempt to strike the man with the rifle butt. A youth dashed forward and grabbed the soldier around the neck and held him until the injured man escaped. The youth ran off into the crowd. The soldier raised the rifle, took deliberate aim and fired. That was the first shot I heard. The soldier, I thought, aimed towards the entry between the Rossville St. block and Joseph Place. The crowd fell back and I saw a man lying on the ground about four or five yards from the spot where the soldier was standing after having fired the shot. I had not seen anyone fire at the soldier nor had I heard any shooting. There were no explosions. ”


1 AH36.12

39.13 In his written statement to this Inquiry, William Harley told us that the man was knocked down in the mouth of the car park.1This is about the position where Sergeant O’s Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) can be seen in the photographs taken by Colman Doyle and Sam Gillespie and reproduced earlier in this report.2

1 AH36.2; AH36.14 2Paragraphs 37.3–4 and 37.7

39.14 William Harley stated that the front of the vehicle hit the man in the back, and the man fell forward and rolled to try to get out of the way. The vehicle kept moving towards the man and it seemed to William Harley that the driver was deliberately trying to run him over. A soldier jumped out of the back of the vehicle and stood over the young man as he was on the ground. He raised his rifle above his head and was about to bring the butt down on the young man’s head when another man ran up behind the soldier, threw his arm round the soldier’s neck, catching his right shoulder, and kept running, spinning the soldier off balance. The young man on the ground stood up and both men ran towards the passage between Blocks 1 and 2. As soon as the soldier regained his balance, he cocked his rifle, put it to his shoulder, aimed in the direction in which the men were running and fired. William Harley did not know whether the bullet hit anyone.

39.15 William Harley told us that at this point he helped a number of children on the balcony outside his flat to safety, and then returned to his flat and went upstairs to the bedroom. We return to his account of what he saw from there later in this report.1

1 Paragraphs 58.19–23 and 63.44

39.16 In the course of his oral evidence to this Inquiry, William Harley was asked about the account that Thomas Harkin had given of the incident. He said that this was nothing like what he saw.1He also said that it was his impression that the driver was deliberately trying to run the man over. However, his evidence continued as follows:2

“Q. In the sense that the man went left and the Pig went left and the man went right and the Pig went right, that sort of thing?

A. In the sense that when the man went to the ground I could see the wheels of the Pig turning slightly, but turning, and keeping rolling towards him.

Q. Without in any way challenging your honesty, Mr Harley, if I suggest to you that is a matter about which there could be two different opinions, would you accept that?

A. Yes. ”


1 Day 77/10-11 2Day 77/47

39.17 The second witness, who gave an account in 1972 of seeing a man hit by an Army vehicle in the car park, was Martin Tucker, who was 17 years old at the time.

39.18 In his NICRA statement dated 1st February 1972,1Martin Tucker recorded that he was watching from a bedroom window in the Rossville Flats and saw that “Two Saracens came roaring up Rossville St. and Chamberlain Street after the crowd. When Saracens entered the car park at the back of the flats I saw a man being hit by Saracen, but he seemed to be uninjured. ”

1 AT17.15

39.19 In his written statement to this Inquiry,1 Martin Tucker said that this happened near the north-east corner of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats. He said that the man looked as if he was in his twenties. He added: “I was not aware of the Saracen deliberately hitting him or moving away to try and avoid him. The man was just in the wrong place and was hit by it. I did not see the man get up but maybe he did. I did not pay much attention to him after that as other things were happening. ”

1 AT17.3; AT17.16

39.20 In his written statement to this Inquiry,1Private INQ 1579 (the driver of Sergeant O’s APC) stated:

“I remember driving onto the tarmac of the car park of the Rossville Flats and seeing a man standing spread eagled in front of us; baiting us to hit him. He was probably one of those who had run with the groups that had scattered as we went in. As soon as I saw him I banged on my brakes but the momentum carried me forward and the front of the pig tapped him causing him to fall down. We hit him at a very low speed. He simply rolled over, got up and ran off. There were no visible wounds or signs of a limp. ”


1 C1579.3

39.21 It appears that he saw no incident in which a soldier raised his rifle butt in order to deliver a blow to the man on the ground or to anyone who had come to his aid.

39.22 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Private INQ 1579 said that when he saw the man he applied his brakes and stopped and “it was just the momentum of the springs sending the vehicle forward an inch or so and nudging him ”. He denied that he had deliberately run the man down.1

1 Day 336/161-163

Consideration of the evidence relating to Thomas Harkin

39.23 In our view all the witnesses whose evidence we have discussed above were referring to the same incident, in which Sergeant O’s APC came into the car park and hit Thomas Harkin.

39.24 Although we believe that Thomas Harkin was doing his best to help the Inquiry, it seemed to us that his recollections of the details of the event after so long were such that we could place little reliance on his account of what happened. He was unsure how he had got into the car park, or of where in the car park he had been hit. He was, on the basis of the evidence we have considered above, wrong in believing that two vehicles had come into the car park, that the one that had hit him had then reversed and that this vehicle had ended up facing north, ie away from the Rossville Flats.

39.25 We formed much the same view of the evidence of James Quinn, since in the end neither he nor we are sure that he actually saw the collision, and since he was wrong in his recollection that two Army vehicles had come into the car park.

39.26 As to the statement made at the time by William Harley, it seems to us, from the other evidence that we have considered about the movement of the Army vehicles, that we can place some reliance on his evidence. The same applies to Martin Tucker.

39.27 While we have no doubt that Thomas Harkin was struck by Sergeant O’s APC, we are of the view that Private INQ 1579 did not deliberately run him down. Martin Tucker did not get that impression, and though William Harley in his evidence to us said that he did, he also accepted, in effect, that this impression might be wrong. We accept Private INQ 1579’s denial that he intended to hit this man.

39.28 It seems to us that Thomas Harkin could not have been hit by the APC when it was travelling at more than a very slow speed. Had it been otherwise we have little doubt that a vehicle of this weight, hitting a person with its front, would have caused serious if not fatal injuries. As it is, the evidence is consistently to the effect that Thomas Harkin very soon got up and ran away. Thomas Harkin told us that his injuries did not require medical treatment. We are not sure whether the vehicle was travelling quite as slowly as Private INQ 1579 told us it was, but we are satisfied that it cannot have been going much faster.

39.29 Whether, as Private INQ 1579 said to us, Thomas Harkin was standing in front of the vehicle, “baiting us to hit him ”, or whether he was hit as he was trying to run away, is not clear from the evidence we have considered. Thomas Harkin appears to have been prepared to throw stones at the vehicles, but may have had second thoughts and tried to run away. He may have “baited ” the soldiers but turned at the last moment, to be hit on the back, though there is no evidence dating from 1972 to show that this is where he was hit.

39.30 In the circumstances we are of the view that no criticism can be fairly made of Private INQ 1579 with regard to this incident.

39.31 Private INQ 1579 told us that the man got up and ran away. According to William Harley, before this happened a soldier ran from the back of the APC and attempted to hit the man with his rifle. We prefer the evidence given in 1972 by William Harley, that the man escaped uninjured, to the inconsistent evidence of Thomas Harkin and James Quinn about an injury to the former caused by a blow struck by the soldier. However, since all three give an account of some altercation with a soldier it seems to us more likely than not that there was some such incident. If William Harley was correct in recording that the soldier came from the back of the APC, this would point to Private T, as he would probably have been the only soldier left in the back of Sergeant O’s APC by this stage. There is nothing in the evidence given by Private T that seems to refer to this incident. Whether the soldier concerned was Private T or another soldier, it is difficult to see what justification there could be for attempting to strike the civilian concerned.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:52

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 40

The arrest of William John Doherty

Chapter 40: The arrest of William John Doherty

40.1 In the context of describing above what Sergeant O said that he did after his Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) had stopped in the car park,1we referred to his written account for the Widgery Inquiry of arresting a man who he said had thrown a bottle at him.2In that account he stated that he and a Lance Corporal had taken this person back to Sergeant O’s APC.3In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Sergeant O said that he had made this arrest near the back wall of 36 Chamberlain Street, ie near the southern end of that street.4

1 Paragraph 37.10

2 B466
3 B467

4 B487


40.2 In his first Royal Military Police (RMP) statement,1Corporal 162 recorded that, after the incident in which a man had thrown a metal stake at him and then had run up the alley to Chamberlain Street (to which we have referred above2), he had run:

“along the waste ground beside the wall of the back yards in Chamberlain St. I got as far as No 30 Chamberlain St where I met [Sergeant] O who had an arrested person with him. He was being bottled and stoned so I took the prisoner from him so that he could return to his platoon. I took the prisoner to my vehicle which was still on the waste ground by Pilot Row. I put the prisoner inside the APC and stayed there about 10 minutes. I then left to return to my platoon but was recalled to move the vehicle forward to the south [sic] end of Block 1 Rossville Flats. After moving the vehicle I left the prisoner in care of […] and […]. ”


1 B1960-1961 2Paragraph 26.10

40.3 30 Chamberlain Street was some 20 yards north of the southern end of that street.

40.4 As will have been seen, Sergeant O told the Widgery Inquiry that his prisoner had been taken back to his APC, while Corporal 162’s account to the RMP was to the effect that he had taken the prisoner back to Lieutenant N’s APC. In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Sergeant O at first maintained that he had taken the prisoner back to his APC, but later, having been shown Corporal 162’s RMP account, agreed that he might have been mistaken.1

1 Day 335/41

40.5 According to the arrest report form prepared at Fort George, the man Sergeant O arrested was William John Doherty, and the reason given for the arrest was that he had assaulted Sergeant O with a bottle. The arrest papers include a statement from Private T in which he said that he had seen William John Doherty throw a bottle at Sergeant O.

40.6 We have no doubt that Sergeant O arrested William John Doherty. Sergeant O said that he had only arrested one person that day,1and he can be seen in the photographs in the arrest papers with this civilian.

1 WT13.39

40.7 William John Doherty was 55 years old at the time and worked for the Londonderry Development Commission. According to his NICRA statement1he was in Rossville Street, where he was affected by CS gas, “and went around the corner into the waste ground area off Rossville Street ”. He went on:

“I had been standing there for 7 to 8 minutes when I saw a section of the crowd running through the waste ground. I knew there must be something wrong and so I began to run also.

I was chased and caught by a soldier wearing riot equipment from the Paratroops. He took me back to a Saracen about 20 yards away. I can’t remember if he said anything. ”


1 AD113.1

40.8 William John Doherty then gave an account of being hit in the face with a rifle butt by a soldier while he was in the vehicle, and of the soldier then firing a rubber bullet at his left arm. We return to this part of his account later in this report.1

1 Chapter 43

40.9 Philip Jacobson of the Sunday Times Insight Team interviewed William John Doherty, who gave him a similar account of his arrest, adding the detail that “the para kicked me all the way back to a Saracen that was standing about 20 yards away where eden street used to be ”.1

1 AD113.3-5

40.10 From this account it appears that William John Doherty was taken to Lieutenant N’s APC, which accords with Corporal 162’s RMP statement, but not with Sergeant O’s account for the Widgery Inquiry. It also accords with the NICRA statement of Duncan Clark1to which we have referred above, in which he recorded that he was ordered to get into the armoured car at “Eden Terrace ”. Duncan Clark added that “The only person in the armoured car was an elderly civilian (badly cut and bleeding) ”.

1 AC61.1

40.11 In our view there is, despite the evidence Sergeant O gave at the time, no doubt that William John Doherty was taken by Corporal 162 to Lieutenant N’s APC. However, it appears from the account that Neil McLaughlin gave to John Barry of the Sunday Times Insight Team1that William John Doherty might first have been brought towards Sergeant O’s APC before being taken by Corporal 162 to that of Lieutenant N. It seems to us that two of the photographs taken by Colman Doyle show Corporal 162 taking William John Doherty to Lieutenant N’s APC.

1 AM347.12; Day 193/158



avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:52

40.12 William John Doherty, who is dead and who gave no evidence to this Inquiry, recorded nothing in his NICRA statement about how he was treated as he was arrested; though, as noted above, he told Philip Jacobson that he had been kicked all the way back to the APC. However, there is convincing evidence that Sergeant O did hit him on the head with his rifle as he made the arrest.

40.13 Sergeant O himself told the Widgery Inquiry in his written statement that “During the struggle while I was grappling with him I held him in my left hand and hit him on the left side of his face with the stock of my rifle held in my right hand. It was the only way of subduing him. ”1In his written statement to this Inquiry,2he told us that “I hit him with my rifle and knocked him to the ground by using the rifle as if it were a baton. I actually smashed the plastic stock of my rifle on his head to subdue my prisoner, and the plastic stock shattered. ” He had told the Widgery Inquiry that the plastic stock on his rifle had broken but not that the damage had been caused when he hit the person he arrested.3

1 B467 3B468

2 B575.112

40.14 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Sergeant O denied that he had been using his rifle like a club, hitting William John Doherty with the butt.1He also said to us2 that William John Doherty was struggling extremely hard and that he acted as he did in order to subdue him. He described hitting him with the stock, holding the rifle where the butt joined onto the rest of the weapon. He also said that during the arrest he was hit by fleeing rioters, receiving one blow in the ribs and another thump round his neck.3 When asked whether he had hit William John Doherty several times on the top of the head, he replied: “Not to my knowledge. I struck him and that was it. ”4

1 Day 335/34; Day 336/20-21

2 Day 335/36
3 Day 335/34-36

4 Day 335/37


40.15 There is a body of civilian evidence that in our view probably relates to the arrest of William John Doherty.

40.16 We have already referred to the evidence of Alana Burke,1when considering the circumstances in which she was hit by Sergeant O’s APC. She said that the incident that she witnessed occurred before she was hit by the vehicle, but in our view she probably got the order of events wrong and was referring to the arrest of William John Doherty, since there is no other evidence of an elderly man being hit in this area before Sergeant O’s APC stopped in the car park.

1 Chapter 38

40.17 Charles Glenn, a volunteer in the Order of Malta Ambulance Corps, gave a NICRA statement1in which he described moving on to the Eden Place waste ground where he treated a man who had been stunned by a rubber bullet. He continued:

“Then the crowd started to run, so I ran too in the direction of the high flats. As I entered the courtyard with the rest of the fleeing crowd, a Humber AC [armoured car] entered and knocked down a youth. I could see other Humber ACs in Rosseville; firing was coming from the cars. This could not have been baton rounds for when the paras came out of the cars, none had rubber bullet guns; all had GLRs [self-loading rifles] or sterlings.

I then saw a paratrooper grab an old man who had been left behind by the crowd and flail him about the head with an ELR [self-loading rifle]. I shouted to him and ordered him to stop. He threw the old man to one side, took up a firing position and prepared to fire. I stood stock still and then was hit by a rifle butt in the chest and knocked to one side, and as I fell, I heard a shot close by my left ear. ”


1 AG43.10

40.18 Charles Glenn also gave an interview to the Sunday Times Insight Team.1In the course of this interview he gave a similar account of seeing a soldier grab an old man and “flay ” (this is probably a mistranscription for “flail ”) him about the head with his rifle. Charles Glenn said that after he had sought to intervene another soldier had run up and hit him in the chest with his rifle butt.

1 AG43.23

40.19 Charles Glenn gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry.1Much of his evidence was concerned with his account of attending to the casualty Jackie Duddy, which we consider later in this report. With regard to the incident under discussion, we formed the view that while Charles Glenn was doing his best to help this Inquiry, he now had no clear recollection of this event. As he put it himself:2

“Over the period since – immediately after the events I found that the events re-played themselves in my head to an extent. But over the years they have separated out and they are no longer quite as clear. But it would certainly be true to say that, um, I would not have been in a position to take cool, calm and collected views of what was going on around me, that would be fair enough, yeah. ”

1 AG43.14; Day 80/173-212; Day 81/1-63
2 Day 81/20-21


40.20 Counsel to the Inquiry prepared what we regard as an accurate summary of the evidence of a number of other civilians that seems to us to relate to the arrest of William John Doherty.1 We set out below an adapted version of this summary which includes some comment of our own.

Celine Brolly

In her NICRA statement2she said: “Then as we were watching out of the back window into the Market we saw three soldiers grab hold of a middleaged man. They kicked punched and battered him and took him away over the ‘Fish’ lane. There was a First Aid boy running to the aid of this man but he was also punched and kicked and thrown on the ground and they shot a rubber bullet at him. He was still lying on the ground and Father Daly called him. ” In her oral evidence to this Inquiry,3Celine Brolly was shown a photograph of Duncan Clark and claimed to recognise him as the middle-aged man who was assaulted. We agree with our counsel that the description in her NICRA statement seems much more likely to relate to William John Doherty and Charles Glenn.

Leo Deehan

In his written statement to this Inquiry,4 he told us: “… I then saw one soldier beating and [sic] elderly man with the butt of his rifle, The old man fought gamely, he went down and the soldier tried to bash him with the rifle again. ” In a document5 which his daughter Maria Nelson explained6 was a draft for a book on which her father was working before he died, he said that the elderly man was facing up to the soldier with his fists up.

Isabella Duffy

In her NICRA statement7 she said that after she had seen a boy fall in the car park of the Rossville Flats, she saw an old man being beaten. She said: “The old man was up against the wall running along the back of the houses in Chamberlain St & joining into the wire at the waste ground. There were 3 soldiers at him. He had a black coat which he tried to pull up over his head to protect it. But they stopped him. They were pulling his legs apart and beating him everywhere. It was terrible – like greyhounds at a hare. I saw two fellows running out to help him. ” She also gave accounts of this incident in her evidence to the Widgery Inquiry8 and her written statement to this Inquiry.9 Since making her statement to this Inquiry, Isabella Duffy has died. She did not give oral evidence.

Elizabeth Dunleavy

In her NICRA statement10 she said: “I saw a young Knight of Malta boy fall in the car park. I think he was hit by a rubber bullet because he got up again. ” In her statement to this Inquiry,11 she said that she saw three soldiers beating a “boy ” about the head and

upper body area with their batons at the position marked B on the plan attached to her statement12 (at the back of the houses on the west side of Chamberlain Street, opposite the access route from Rossville Street to the car park of the Rossville Flats). Then she saw a “boy ” wearing Order of Malta Ambulance Corps uniform hit by a baton round.13

Margaret Fetherston

In her written statement to this Inquiry,14 she recalled seeing a man in the mouth of the car park of the Rossville Flats standing his ground defiantly and shouting at the soldiers. One or two soldiers beat him up. “It is hard for me to be precise about how exactly he was being hit. I know he was being hit with a rifle; I think with the front of the rifle rather than its butt and I remember seeing a piece of the rifle fall off. He was also kicked. ” Margaret Fetherston also gave an account of this incident to Jane Winter of British Irish Rights Watch,15 in which she said: “He was then set upon by two soldiers who beat him to a pulp and hit him about his head with their rifle butts. ” Margaret Fetherston was only 15 years old at the time. She was not called to give oral evidence to this Inquiry.

Patrick Joseph Harkin

In his NICRA statement16 he said that he saw two soldiers catch hold of a “bin man with the Corporation ” and beat him about the head with their rifles. The man was about 50 years old. They took him “around by what was Eden Place ”. Patrick Joseph Harkin described the incident in similar terms in his written statement to this Inquiry.17

Christy Lavery

In his written statement to this Inquiry,18 he told us that he saw a soldier beating a tall, thin, silver-haired, elderly man with the butt of his rifle in a location to the north of Eden Place. Christy Lavery ran over to the soldier and attempted without success to pull off his gas mask. If the elderly man was William John Doherty, Christy Lavery was mistaken about where the incident occurred. In his interview with Kathleen Keville,19 he said that soldiers were beating two men with batons, apparently somewhere close to the car park of the Rossville Flats, but he made no reference to an elderly man or to the use of a rifle butt.

John McCrudden

In his NICRA statement20 he recorded that “One soldier jumped out from the front seat. He ran over to the wall at the back of Chamberlain St … He caught a man and holding him with one hand beat him with a rifle butt. ” He also gave accounts of this incident in his written and oral evidence to this Inquiry.21

Patrick McCrudden

In his NICRA statement22 he recorded that “While one soldier was attacking a middle-aged man, a member of the Order of Malta attempted to intervene. The soldier turned and struck the first aid man (dressed in the usual grey uniform) first with the butt of the rifle on both body and face and kicked him. The Order of Malta man collapsed and disappeared from view behind a wall. The middle aged man was arrested. ”

Manus McDaid

In his written statement to this Inquiry23 he told us that he saw a soldier striking an old man with the butt of his rifle at approximately point E on the plan attached to his statement24 (ie at the back of 36 Chamberlain Street, where Sergeant O said that the arrest of William John Doherty took place). Manus McDaid described the man as pale, thin, in his mid-sixties, and wearing a flat cap and brown overcoat. The soldier seemed to be holding the man with one arm, while trying to strike him with the rifle butt held in his other hand.

William McDonagh

In his NICRA statement25 he said that he saw a soldier throw an elderly man against a wall at the back of Chamberlain Street and begin hitting him with his rifle butt. Two youths attempted to free the man without any success. When he made his written statement to this Inquiry26 his recollection was that two soldiers had held the man while another had his rifle raised as though about to hit him, but that he had not actually seen the soldier hit the man.

Michael McKinney

In his written statement to this Inquiry,27 he recorded that he saw a group of soldiers at the west gable end of Chamberlain Street beating a man in a dark suit who had at one time been employed as a bin man. They were beating him with their fists and one soldier seemed to be trying to hit him with the butt of his rifle. He was “trying desperately to protect himself from the soldiers but was beaten bloody ”. Michael McKinney died without having signed his statement.

Susanna Miller

In her written statement to this Inquiry,28 she described seeing a balding man, probably in his early fifties, wearing a three-quarter-length dark coat, at approximately point B on the plan attached to her statement29 (ie at the back of 36 Chamberlain Street). Two soldiers hit the man three or four times in the face with their rifle butts. He tried to resist by sheltering his face with his forearm. He seemed angry and it looked as though he was cursing the soldiers. Susanna Miller did not give oral evidence.

Joseph Ernest Moore

In his NICRA statement,30 his statement to the Widgery Inquiry31 and his written evidence to this Inquiry,32 he gave accounts of seeing two soldiers severely beating an elderly grey-haired man with the butts of their rifles.

Hugh O’Donnell

In his NICRA statement33 he described seeing “a big soldier clubbing an old man over the head with a rifle and then he moved on to a first aid man who was administering to someone on the ground and he clubbed him also ”. In his written statement to this Inquiry34 he recalled that he recognised the old man as “one of our bin men ” but did not know his name. He said that the man had been trying to get out of the way and the soldier knocked him hard over the head with the barrel of his rifle. In oral evidence35 he said, by way of correction to his written statement, that the incident took place at the back of the Chamberlain Street houses, about two or three houses from the south-west end. When he was shown36 one of the photographs of William John Doherty, he said that he was not the bin man whom he had seen being attacked. However, since this account otherwise tallies closely with others that are clearly referable to the arrest of William John Doherty, we consider it likely that Hugh O’Donnell was mistaken about this.

1 CS4.55-59

2 AB88.9

3 Day 94/55

4 AD178.5

5 AD178.16

6 AN14.4

7 AD158.15

8 AD158.8; WT5.54

9 AD158.3

10 AD169.5

11 AD169.1

12 AD169.4

13 In Londonderry the expression “boy ” is often used to describe a male person of any age. See, for example, the evidence of Denis Patrick McLaughlin (Day 159/68).

14 AF5.2

15 AF5.14

16 AH27.4

17 AH27.2
18 AL5.2

19 AL5.8

20 AM152.10

21 AM152.2; Day 95/93-95; Day 95/137-142

22 AM153.15

23 AM169.2

24 AM169.5

25 AM192.7

26 AM192.2

27 AM308.4

28 AM402.1

29 AM402.5

30 AM413.13

31 AM413.10

32 AM413.3

33 AO31.8

34 AO31.3

35 Day 79/133-134

36 Day 79/175-176


40.21 We should also refer to the account given in John Barry’s interview of Willy Barber:1

“I was running up towards the wire. And beyond the fencing, with his back to the wall at an angle, there was a Para grasping an old man – he must have been fifty–sixty – with his left hand, grasping him by his coat, and trying to beat hell out of him with the barrel of the rifle he was holding in his right hand. It was a very awkward movement, that was what I noticed. I ran past them. There didnt seem to be many people behind me, though there were people trying to get through at the same time as me. But I felt a bit guilty, and at the Chamberlain St gable I turned and there was a person standing there, thumping the soldier in the face with his fist. And he got the old man free. But then he ran off and the soldier got the old man again. I know the man and I’ll introduce you to him. ”


1 AB9.2

40.22 It will be noted that many of these witnesses refer to the civilian being beaten with the butt of a rifle. However, some give an account that is consistent with Sergeant O’s description of hitting the man with the stock, not the butt, of his rifle. Some have referred to more than one soldier attacking William John Doherty, but their evidence does not persuade us that anyone apart from Sergeant O was involved at this stage.

40.23 There is no doubt that significant physical force was used in the arrest of William John Doherty. Duncan Clark recorded that when he was put in the APC, there was already in there a man who was badly cut and bleeding. We have no doubt that this was William John Doherty, though, as we discuss below, it is possible that this injury was sustained, or partly sustained, after William John Doherty had been put in this vehicle. It seems to us that he may also have been kicked while being taken to the APC, though we are far from certain about this. We consider later in this report1what happened to William John Doherty when he was put into the APC.

1 Chapter 43

40.24 William John Doherty denied in his NICRA statement and in his interview with Philip Jacobson that he had thrown a bottle, and said nothing about struggling to free himself from Sergeant O or being hit on the head with a rifle at this stage. On the other hand Sergeant O has consistently said that these things happened. In our view they did. The fact that William John Doherty said nothing about being hit or injured at this stage is to our minds a possible indication that he did not want to say anything about why he was arrested or his attempts to escape. It may also indicate that some of the accounts of the witnesses summarised above exaggerated the degree of violence used on him.

40.25 Sergeant O said to us that he could not have simply seized William John Doherty without hitting him because “he was struggling extremely hard, trying to get away. I was determined he was not, so I subdued him. ” Sergeant O denied that he had hit William John Doherty more than once, or kicked him back to the APC, or struck an Order of Malta Ambulance Corps volunteer.1However, the fact remains that Sergeant O hit William John Doherty on his head. This, to our minds, was a self-evidently dangerous thing to do. We are not persuaded that it was necessary for Sergeant O to hit this 55-year-old man on the head, though we do not criticise him for using the plastic stock part of his rifle as a sort of baton. A man of 55, apparently in a job requiring a degree of physical strength (a Londonderry Development Commission municipal waste collector), was not in our view necessarily incapable, by reason of his age, of either throwing a missile at the soldiers or trying hard to get away when arrested.

1 Day 335/36-44

40.26 We should add at this point that we accept that Charles Glenn was hit in the chest with a rifle butt and knocked to the ground by a soldier. We can see no justification for this assault. We do not know who this soldier was.

40.27 We now consider the incident in which Pat Cashman was hit by a baton round.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:53

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 41

The incident concerning Pat Cashman

Chapter 41: The incident concerning Pat Cashman

41.1 As already noted, Pat Cashman was a photographer working for the Irish Press. He was assigned with his colleague Colman Doyle to cover the civil rights march on 30th January 1972. He made no statement in 1972, but in his written account to this Inquiry1he stated that his camera had been sprayed by the Army water cannon in William Street. His statement continued:

“I had to take time out to clean both my cameras (most of the visual media were doing the same). Having cleaned a camera (as well as possible) I heard shooting near the Rossville Flats and rushed from the barrier to the open area around the flats. On entering the open area I was confronted by a British soldier who after taking deliberate aim at me, shot me in the right arm with a rubber bullet from a range of maybe 30 feet. I had my hands in the air with the one working camera in my right hand and the bullet hit my right elbow.

Feeling the shock of the bullet striking my elbow I dropped the camera and fell to the ground on one knee. My colleague Colman Doyle having seen what happened came to my rescue and took me from the open space back to William Street. I went back to the Melville Hotel on my own where I tried to take down the swelling with cold water. I did not know at that stage whether the elbow was broken or how badly injured it was. It was very sore and unable to hold any of my photographic equipment. ”


1 M103.1

41.2 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Pat Cashman told us that the shooting he heard that caused him to go to the Eden Place waste ground was that of baton rounds. He also said that he was running across the open ground towards the Rossville Flats to catch up with the action and towards the soldier with the baton gun, but that apart from Colman Doyle who he thought was near him, he was not conscious of other civilians around him at the time. He described the baton gunner as holding his baton gun at his waist when he fired:1

“A. At the moment I was shouting ‘press’; I had the camera in the air shouting ‘press’ and he did not pause, he just straight – it was – to me it was a deliberate act.

Q. At the time the soldier fired, did you have a sense of others being around you, of other civilians?

A. No. ”


1 Day 182/101-106; Day 182/123-125

41.3 In his written account for the Widgery Inquiry,1Colman Doyle stated that it was after he had taken the photographs of the arrest of William John Dillon and then a further photograph of the Order of Malta Ambulance Corps volunteer Charles McMonagle lying on the ground at the back of the Chamberlain Street houses, that “I then noticed a colleague from my paper, Pat Cashman, who had been badly hurt by a rubber bullet ”.

1 M23.1-2

41.4 In his written evidence to this Inquiry, Colman Doyle recalled that he had heard Pat Cashman call out before he had photographed the arrest of William John Dillon, and said that he saw his colleague at a point that he marked as being on the waste ground just north of Eden Place.1 According to this statement, it was only after he had helped Pat Cashman away to William Street that he returned and took the photographs of the arrest of William John Dillon.

1 M23.1-2; M23.37

41.5 In our view Colman Doyle’s evidence to us shows that Pat Cashman was injured close to Eden Place, though Colman Doyle did not see it happen. However, there is an inconsistency between his evidence to us and his account to the Widgery Inquiry as to when he noticed that Pat Cashman had been hurt. When this inconsistency was drawn to his attention, he was unsure whether he had photographed the arrest of William John Dillon before or after he had helped Pat Cashman back to William Street.1

1 Day 72/124-134

41.6 In our view, Colman Doyle was mistaken in his recollection of the sequence in which things happened, in the account he gave us so many years later. Events were moving very fast on the Eden Place waste ground and it seems to us that there would not have been time for Colman Doyle to take his colleague back to William Street and then return to photograph the arrest of William John Dillon. We have no reason to doubt the sequence as he related it to the Widgery Inquiry. On this basis it was probably shortly after he had taken the photographs of the arrest of William John Dillon and the photograph of Charles McMonagle at the back of the Chamberlain Street houses that he became aware that his colleague had been injured. This in our view was probably very soon after the injury had happened, as Colman Doyle recalled Pat Cashman calling out.

41.7 We have no means of identifying the baton gunner who was involved, save that it was probably not Private 017, who is likely to have been on the other side of Rossville Street.

41.8 From Pat Cashman’s evidence it appears that there were, apart from Colman Doyle, no other civilians around him when he was hit. We also accept that he had his camera in the air and that he was shouting “press ”. Whichever baton gunner it was, we can find nothing that suggests that he had, or could have believed that he had, any good reason to fire at or towards Pat Cashman.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:54

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 42

The arrest of James Charles Doherty

Chapter 42: The arrest of James Charles Doherty

42.1 James Charles Doherty was 23 at the time of Bloody Sunday. In his Keville interview he said this:1

“We were stand – we were standing – we took part in the demonstration and we got as far as William Street and the demonstration stopped and tear smoke and rubber bullets started to fly. We were standing there watching everything to see what would happen and er – three saracens, three or four saracens I didn’t count. I just started running. Three or four saracens come up that street. Everybody run and the saracen cut in and I shot in past them and I thought I was away out of the road you know. And all of a sudden two more pulling in the – in towards the, the flats … fell – I was running. Two come – two, two soldiers come running at me and I fell and as I fell he was coming down on me with batons and boots, and kicking me and battering me you know. He grabbed, grabbed hold of me by the hair and dragging me along the ground you know. And I was sort of well dazed like, I didn’t know where I was. And er – I went to get up on my feet and your man just clout me on the head with a baton and he dragged me over to a wall and he made me stand up against the wall with me arms out and he’s kicked my legs open and he said “stand there now ” … something like that. We are the parachutists or something like we’re the parachuters or something like that.

[Female voice] Paratroopers?

Yeah, something like that … I was standing there and they dragged this other fella over and they pulled us into a – a saracen … pulled us into the saracen, threw us in there. ”


1 AD69.18-19

42.2 James Charles Doherty also made a NICRA statement, in which he gave the following account of his arrest:1

“I was now standing round the corner of a burnt-out dry cleaners. I saw a Saracen armoured car coming across Rossville St. I thought it was only coming to scatter the crowd and then to do a U turn. But it turned to face towards High St. and soldiers jumped out screaming with batons and rifles flying. I tried to run but two more armoured cars pulled in front of me. I was caught in a group hemmed in by these armoured cars. The crowd tried to escape, some towards High St., some tried to climb back walls. I ran towards the car park of the High Flats, but fell. As I tried to rise, one soldier struck me on the back of the head with a baton, whilst another kicked me on the back, arms and head. I lost consciousness for a second, and when I came to, I was being dragged by the hair, and by the coat by these two soldiers. Each time I tried to get to my feet, I was kicked as they shouted, ‘Come on, you pig, it’s the Paratroopers you’re dealing with now’. I was dragged into a Saracen, there were five soldiers there as well as the two who brought me in. They kept shouting, ‘Just you wait, you pig, we’re going to kick you to death.’ They kept striking me with batons and mouthing obscene remarks. Another man about my age was dragged in with his face covered with blood. A soldier kept hitting him across the face, butting him with his helmet – and bruising and cutting his mouth and nose. I saw through the open door a line of teenagers and men – all prisoners of soldiers – go past with their hands on their heads. I heard a command and we were pulled from the armoured car. We were dragged across Rossville St. and made to stand against a wall with hands and legs spread wide and our whole weight resting at a painful angle. Then we were dragged around a corner into William St. and had to stand the same way while seated soldiers swore at us and jabbed at our ankles with their guns. ”


1 AD69.15

42.3 James Charles Doherty gave written and oral evidence to this Inquiry. In his written account1he stated that he had been at the north-west corner of the junction of Rossville Street and William Street when the Army vehicles came in. He ran along Rossville Street, and was running across the waste ground towards the car park of the Rossville Flats when he slipped on some ice at a point about halfway along Pilot Row, fell to the ground, and was arrested as he tried to raise himself.2

1 AD69.2 2AD69.8

42.4 According to the Fort George arrest papers, James Charles Doherty was arrested by Lance Corporal INQ 627 for throwing stones at the security forces.

42.5 Lance Corporal INQ 627 was a signaller who had travelled in Major Loden’s command vehicle. Lance Corporal INQ 627 stated in his written account to this Inquiry1 that he made no arrests on Bloody Sunday. However, in the course of his oral evidence he was shown the arrest papers relating to James Charles Doherty and acknowledged that he had in fact made an arrest, but said that he had no independent recollection of it.2

1 C627.4 2Day 338/65-68

42.6 In his NICRA account James Charles Doherty, describing what happened while he was being held at Fort George, stated:1

“The paratroopers came back. The one that had arrested me grabbed me again, took me to a door and into a room where there were soldiers, police and a photographer. We were made to stand against a board one at a time. On the board was written my name and the name of the soldier who arrested me; the soldier stood beside me, under our names, and two photographs of us were taken. ”


1 AD69.16

42.7 James Charles Doherty stated much the same in his written evidence to this Inquiry.1 However, his oral evidence to this Inquiry was to the effect that the soldier photographed with him was not the soldier who arrested him, though the reason he said this was that when he saw the photograph he thought that it showed a soldier who was much taller than the soldier whom he remembered.2

1 AD69.6
2 Day 104/102-103; Day 104/128-129


42.8 The representatives of the majority of the families suggested that Lance Corporal INQ 627 might have falsely claimed at Fort George that he was the soldier who arrested James Charles Doherty.1 We do not accept this suggestion. In our view James Charles Doherty’s recollection that the arresting soldier was shorter than the one shown in the arrest photograph is a false memory, and we prefer the account that he gave at the time.

1 FS1.1335

42.9 It is not clear whether James Charles Doherty was arrested because he had been throwing stones. In his Keville interview,1 and in his written statements,2 he stated that when allegations including riotous behaviour and stone throwing were put to him at Fort George he denied them. He did not in his interview or in his written statements say expressly whether he had thrown any stones or not. In oral evidence to this Inquiry,3 he said that he did not remember or believe that he had been throwing stones, although he accepted that it was possible that he had thrown a stone. Later in his oral evidence4 he admitted that he may well have been throwing stones “up near Rossville Street ”, but the context leaves some ambiguity as to whether this admission was intended to relate to the moments immediately before he was arrested or to the earlier stage of events when stoning was taking place at Barrier 12. Since Lance Corporal INQ 627 told us he had no memory of the incident and since there was no other evidence of the circumstances of the arrest, we remain in doubt whether James Charles Doherty was arrested because he was seen throwing stones, or whether he was arrested simply because he had fallen over and could thus be captured.

1 AD69.20

2 AD69.16; AD69.6
3 Day 104/103

4 Day 104/115-116


42.10 In his Keville interview1 James Charles Doherty said that one of the soldiers kicked him and hit him with a baton, and then grabbed him by the hair and dragged him along the ground. He tried to stand up and the soldier hit him on the head with a baton. He was made to stand against a wall and the soldier kicked his legs apart. Then he was thrown into a vehicle where he witnessed a paratrooper assaulting another civilian.

1 AD69.18-19

42.11 In his NICRA account1 he stated that after he had fallen down and as he tried to raise himself, one soldier struck him on the back of the head with a baton, while another kicked him on the back, arms and head. He lost consciousness for a second. When he came round, the two soldiers were dragging him by the hair and coat. Each time he tried to get to his feet, he was kicked. He was dragged into a vehicle where there were five more soldiers in addition to the two who had apprehended him. They kept striking him with batons and mouthing obscene remarks. He again referred to the assaults on another civilian in the vehicle.

1 AD69.15

42.12 In his evidence to this Inquiry, James Charles Doherty told us that as he was taken to the vehicle he fell and a soldier thrust his rifle butt as hard as possible onto his right hand, causing it to bleed. He also told us that he was kicked, punched and head-butted with a visor when he was in the vehicle.1 He did not mention these assaults in the accounts that he gave in 1972. When asked about this, he said: “I may be just getting confused. At that stage I did not know what I was getting hit with, I was just trying to keep me head down. ”2

1 AD69.3; Day 104/83 2Day 104/134

42.13 The arrest photograph shows no visible signs of injury on James Charles Doherty. There are two photographs in which he identified himself and in which his right hand is visible, but which do not seem to show any signs of injury to that hand.1

1 AD69.4; Day 104/91
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:55



avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:55

42.14 James Charles Doherty denied that he had exaggerated the violence inflicted on him.1 In our view, from the accounts that he gave at the time and particularly from what he said in his Keville interview, he probably was subjected to excessive force when he was arrested and as he was taken to the vehicle. It is possible that he was assaulted when in the vehicle, as he described in his NICRA statement,2 but here we are less sure, since he said nothing to Kathleen Keville about this.

1 Day 104/115 2AD69.15

42.15 As we noted when considering the arrest of William John Dillon,1Major Loden told us that he hit a man with his baton while attempting to arrest him.2It is possible that this was William John Dillon, because Major Loden’s driver, Private 037, was concerned in his arrest; but since James Charles Doherty was arrested by one of Major Loden’s signallers, Lance Corporal INQ 627, who had travelled in Major Loden’s command vehicle, on the same basis it could have been him.

1 Chapter 33 2B2283.005

42.16 Major Loden gave this account in his written evidence to this Inquiry:1

“34. I am not certain of the precise order of events when I got out of my vehicle. I recall grappling with a man, at least one man being arrested and incoming automatic gunfire. These events all happened relatively quickly and my best recollection now is that they were in the following order. When my vehicle came to a stop on Rossville Street, I got out along with my signallers and possibly driver. I was immediately confronted by a group of young men. I cannot remember how many: it was not more than 10, but at least 4. It seemed to me that they were deciding whether to attack. As they were sizing us up, I decided to take the initiative and to attempt to effect an arrest. In doing so I hit one of them with my baton, which broke. Two other soldiers joined me to help with arrests. ”


1 B2283.005

42.17 Major Loden denied an allegation, made by Private 027 in an account written in about 1975,1 that he had leaned out of the back of his vehicle and hit an arrested man over the head with a baton.2

1 B1565.008 2 Day 344/23

42.18 In the course of Major Loden’s oral evidence to this Inquiry, there was this exchange:1

“Q. It looks, does it not, from your contemporaneous account as if your recollection was of engaging with two rioters whom your crew arrested rather than somewhere between four and ten with whom you engaged, breaking a baton. Do you think over the passage of the years your recollection may have become at fault?

A. (Pause) Well, it certainly – it is a long time, but there were a lot of rioters in the area; some were nearer to us than others, but I, I am really – I cannot really differentiate now. I mean, I think my recollection may be slightly different now than it was at the time.

Q. I want to show you how you put it in your own words to Lord Widgery. Could we have a look at B2252 from letter A to C. The way in which you put it, was this – you were asked:

‘Question: When you got your vehicles into that position, what happened?

Answer: Well, the soldiers de-bussed from the vehicles and started to make arrests.

Question: Did you see any arrests made?

Answer: Yes.

Question: How many?

Answer: Well, there were two in the case of my own vehicle.

Question: Who arrested them?

Answer: My driver arrested one chap and the other person, I do not know. It was another soldier from behind me. I do not know who it was.

Question: Very close to your vehicle?

Answer: Yes, very close to my vehicle.

Question: Did anything happen then?

Answer: Well, as we got out of our vehicle and as these arrests were taking place a burst of about 15 rounds of low velocity fire was directed at us.’

It does look rather as if arrests were carried out of two people by your crew but not by you, does it not?

A. Absolutely, but I did not arrest anybody in the end, um, I attempted to but I did not succeed. ”


1 Day 342/54-56

42.19 In view of the evidence given by Major Loden in 1972, it seems to us that his recollection of being confronted by a group of young men sizing up whether to attack him and his soldiers is erroneous, as indeed he appeared to acknowledge to us might be the case.

42.20 Neither Lance Corporal INQ 627 nor Private 013 suggested at any time that Major Loden had assisted either of them. Although in his written statement dated 17th February 19721 Major Loden recorded that “The crew of my vehicle debussed and we arrested the two young men ”, as can be seen from the exchange during his oral evidence to this Inquiry, his recollection was that it was his soldiers and not he who had carried out the two arrests, while he had attempted but failed to arrest anybody.

1 B2221

42.21 In these circumstances it seems to us unlikely that Major Loden used his baton either on William John Dillon or on James Charles Doherty, but rather in an unsuccessful attempt to arrest someone else. We do not know who this might have been and have insufficient evidence to form a view as to whether Major Loden was justified in using his baton as he told us he did. As to Private 027’s allegation that Major Loden had leaned out of the back of his vehicle and hit an arrested man over the head, it should be noted that in his oral evidence to this Inquiry Private 027 said that he no longer had a recollection of this incident.1For reasons given elsewhere in this report,2there are doubts about the reliability of the accounts that Private 027 has given over the years. There is nothing else to support this allegation, and we are not persuaded by it.

1 Day 246/108 2Chapter 179

42.22 We have discussed the arrest of Charles Canning earlier in this report.1 It seems to us that he was probably arrested shortly after James Charles Doherty, as they have both given evidence that the former was put in the vehicle after the latter.

1 Chapter 35

42.23 We have also discussed above1 the arrest of Duncan Clark and William John Doherty. As we have described, they were both taken to Lieutenant N’s Armoured Personnel Carrier. We now turn to consider what then happened to them.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:56

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume III - Chapter 43

The treatment of Duncan Clark and William John Doherty after arrest

Chapter 43: The treatment of Duncan Clark and William John Doherty after arrest

43.1 We have set out part of Duncan Clark’s NICRA statement above1 when dealing with his arrest. That statement continued:2

“The only person in the armoured car was an elderly civilian (badly cut and bleeding). About 10 minutes later gas started to come into the car. I opened the door to get air and was promptly hit on the head with a rifle butt. The cut received required 2 stitches later.

The armoured car was then driven to William St. We sat there and after about 5 minutes a paratrooper opened the door and said, ‘What do you think this is, you Irish Cunt’ and then fired a rubber bullet into my face (from about 5 feet). I was badly stunned, and bled profusely.

Sometime after this the elderly man and myself were taken from the armoured car and put into a military police land rover where we remained for about ½ hour. The paratrooper who arrested me took me from the land rover to the back of an army lorry and told me to jump inside. ”


1 Paragraph 30.17 2AC61.1

43.2 We have also set out above part of William John Doherty’s NICRA statement when dealing with his arrest. That statement continued:1

“I was put inside the Saracen. As I was sitting there, he said ‘You Irish bastard’. He then lifted his rifle and hit me in the face with the butt. The injury was in the area of my left eye. Then a soldier, who I believe to be the same one, fired a rubber bullet at my left arm, hitting me just above the elbow. The paid [sic] was very bad. I said nothing, because if I had I would have been murdered.

About 15 to 20 minutes later we were taken out of the Saracen. I was accompanied all this time by another man who had also been arrested. He witnessed all these incidents. His name is Mr Stuart Duncan Clarke of […], Londonderry. He is an Englishman from London. I also witnessed him being assaulted, and he had to have 4 stitches put in his nose.

We were taken to the Military Police van as I stated earlier. Our particulars were taken. We were in the lorry for 20 to 25 minutes. We were no handled roughly then. The lorry then moved further up the waste ground towards Rossville Street flats.

We were then driven to William Street and transferred to a large Army truck. ”


1 AD113.1

43.3 It is clear from the earlier part of William John Doherty’s NICRA statement that it was the soldier who had brought him to the APC who hit him in the face. On William John Doherty’s evidence, the same soldier had been responsible for his arrest.

43.4 William John Doherty gave much the same account to Philip Jacobson of the Sunday Times Insight Team, describing the soldier who arrested him, and then took him to the APC and hit him in the face, as “certainly scottish ”, although in contrast to what he had said in his NICRA statement, he told Philip Jacobson that he was not sure whether it was the same soldier who then fired the rubber bullet that hit him in the arm.1In his note of this interview, Philip Jacobson recorded that he had seen the scars that the rifle blow had caused.

1 AD113.3-5

43.5 We have shown above the two photographs taken by Colman Doyle of Duncan Clark being taken by Lieutenant N and Private INQ 1918 towards Lieutenant N’s APC. Next on the contact sheets that contain these photographs is a photograph Colman Doyle took of the scene at the back of that APC. For ease of reference we show below the two photographs of Duncan Clark being taken to the APC, together with the photograph of the scene at the APC.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:58





avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:59

43.6 From our discussion of the circumstances of Duncan Clark’s arrest, we are sure that the soldier on the right of this photograph is Private INQ 1918, the radio operator. We are also sure that the soldier on the left is Lieutenant N, who in his oral evidence to this Inquiry agreed that this was probably the case.1The civilian partially hidden by the back door of the APC is in our view Duncan Clark, as from the contact sheets it can be seen that this photograph was taken after those showing him being brought to the APC.

1 Day 322/87

43.7 Colman Doyle was using three cameras on the day.1 His photographs of William John Doherty being escorted to Lieutenant N’s APC, which are reproduced earlier in this report,2 were taken with a different camera from the one he used to photograph Duncan Clark. It seems to us that since William John Doherty was put into the APC before Duncan Clark and since the photographs of Duncan Clark being escorted to the APC show him in a position that must be very close to the APC, Colman Doyle must have taken the photographs of William John Doherty before the photographs of Duncan Clark being escorted to the APC and of the scene at the APC. As we have already noted, in his NICRA statement Duncan Clark recorded that when he was ordered to get into the APC there was already in the vehicle “an elderly civilian (badly cut and bleeding) ”.3

1 Day 72/133

2 Paragraph 40.11
3 AC61.1


43.8 According to his first RMP statement,1after bringing William John Doherty to the APC, Corporal 162 stayed there “about 10 minutes ”. On the basis of this account, he is in our view one of the other two soldiers seen at the back of the APC in the last of the photographs reproduced above. The remaining soldier seems to us to have been Lance Corporal INQ 768, whose evidence of staying at the back of the APC we have already considered.2

1 B1960 2Paragraphs 24.8–9

43.9 In our view it is possible, as he claimed, that William John Doherty was struck on the face by a rifle butt when he was in the APC, though to our minds the possibility also exists that he did not wish to describe the circumstances of his arrest by Sergeant O, and so said that he had been hit with a rifle butt in the APC in order to account for facial injuries that had in fact been caused by Sergeant O in the course of arresting him.

43.10 According to Philip Jacobson’s note,1William John Doherty was hurled into the vehicle and “as he got up the scottish para said ‘you irish bastard’ and crashed the butt of his rifle into doherty’s face ”. This is not consistent with William John Doherty’s NICRA statement, in which he described being struck as he was sitting in the vehicle.

1 AD113.3

43.11 If William John Doherty was struck in the APC this must in our view have been before Lieutenant N and Private INQ 1918 arrived with Duncan Clark, as the latter does not refer in his NICRA statement to an assault on William John Doherty, but only to seeing him in the APC with the injuries he described. Lieutenant N told the Widgery Inquiry that he moved straight to the back of the Chamberlain Street houses after putting his prisoner in his APC, leaving a corporal to take charge.1The photograph shown above seems to show Lieutenant N leaving the vehicle to go back. Lance Corporal INQ 768 told us in his written statement2that he did not see anyone beaten up, and it is possible he was right about this, since if the incident took place it was inside the APC and he might not have been in a position to see it, though it is also possible that he might have heard it. Private INQ 1918 told us that he had no memory of going back to the APC either with Duncan Clark or at any other stage,3though in our view the photographs show that he did go with Duncan Clark to that vehicle.

1 B399

2 C768.5
3 Day 342/109; Day 342/117; Day 342/133


43.12 In his NICRA account and in his interview with Philip Jacobson, William John Doherty stated that it was the soldier who arrested him, whom he described as Scottish, who took him back to the APC and there assaulted him. As we have already described,1it was Sergeant O, who is Scottish and who told us that he was the only Scottish soldier in his platoon,2who arrested William John Doherty. The evidence that we have considered, including Corporal 162’s own account, shows that it was the latter who took him back to the APC, and that Sergeant O went back towards his own APC. Accordingly, William John Doherty was wrong in saying that it was the soldier who arrested him who took him to the APC and there assaulted him.

1 Chapter 40 2Day 335/139-140

43.13 Corporal 162 was asked in his oral evidence whether anyone had assaulted the man in the APC.1His answer was “Not as far as I am aware ”.

1 Day 323/194

43.14 We are left in considerable doubt as to whether or not William John Doherty was hit with a rifle butt when he was in the APC. It is clear that he was hit on the head by Sergeant O in the course of his arrest and to our minds this could account for the injuries observed by Duncan Clark. It is possible that he was hit twice on the head, once by Sergeant O and once again in the APC, but in the end we have concluded that the likely explanation for his injury is that it was caused by Sergeant O alone in the course of arresting William John Doherty; and that William John Doherty made up an account of being struck by a rifle in the APC in order to divert attention from the circumstances of his arrest. His wrong identification of the Scottish soldier who arrested him as the soldier who had assaulted him in the APC and his inconsistent accounts of what he was doing when, according to him, he was struck in the APC, in our view lend support to this conclusion.

43.15 According to Duncan Clark, he too was hit on the head with a rifle butt, but from his NICRA statement it appears that this was some ten minutes after he had been put into the APC. We have no reason to doubt that he was hit, but we are unable to determine which soldier was responsible for what in our view was an unjustified assault.

43.16 In the statements that they made at the time, both Duncan Clark and William John Doherty described a soldier firing his baton gun into the APC. Duncan Clark stated that this happened after the vehicle had been driven to William Street, that the soldier fired from a range of about 5ft and that the round hit him in the face. William John Doherty stated that he too was hit by a baton round that hit him just above the elbow of his left arm.

43.17 Captain 200 was the Commander of Composite Platoon (Guinness Force). He had come into the Bogside in one of the soft-sided lorries of that platoon. In his RMP statement,1he described moving to the northern end of the Rossville Flats to check in with his Company Commander. “On arriving, I noticed one APC of the Mortar Platoon arrive with at least two civilian bodies in the back. Also at this time I saw one of our soldiers fire one rubber bullet from a RUC gun into the back of another APC at point blank range. ” Captain 200 told us in his written statement to this Inquiry that he did not recognise the soldier who had done this but that it was not one of his men.2

1 B1980 2B2022.007

43.18 Lieutenant N’s APC was moved after the shooting had ended in Sector 2 to the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats. Major Loden then ordered Lieutenant N to use his APC to collect bodies from the rubble barricade in Rossville Street, and this was then done.1We consider this event in more detail later in this report,2but William John Doherty and Duncan Clark must have been removed from the APC before this happened. Thus, in our view Duncan Clark was mistaken in recalling that the baton gun was fired when the APC was in William Street and Captain 200 was mistaken in recalling that the baton gun was fired into a different APC from the one that collected bodies.

1 B399-400 2Chapter 122

43.19 What we regard as certain is that a baton round was fired into the APC containing Duncan Clark and William John Doherty, and that this occurred after Lieutenant N’s APC had been moved to the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats and before that APC was used to collect bodies from the rubble barricade.

43.20 It was submitted by the representatives of the majority of the families that the soldier who fired this baton round was Private 019, one of the two baton gunners who had travelled into the Bogside in Lieutenant N’s APC.1

1 FS1.1337-1338

43.21 Though it is possible that Private 019 was responsible, we are not persuaded that he was. The submission does not seem to take account of the fact that the baton round was fired after the APC had moved to the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats. In his RMP statement,1Corporal 162 recorded that after he had taken his prisoner (William John Doherty) to the APC he had stayed there about ten minutes, and had then left to return to his platoon “but was recalled to move the vehicle forward to the south [sic] end of Block 1 Rossville Flats. After moving the vehicle I left the prisoner in care of […] and […] ”. In his oral evidence to this Inquiry, Corporal 162 told us that he would not have known at the time which was the south end and which the north, and that he could no longer remember to where the vehicle was moved.2In our view the reference to the south end of Block 1 is a mistake for the north end.

1 B1960-1961 2Day 323/192

43.22 On the basis of Corporal 162’s account, Private 013 could be the soldier responsible, but so could any of the other baton gunners of Mortar Platoon. None admitted to firing his baton gun in this manner. It is also possible that a baton gunner from one of the other platoons of Support Company was responsible, though we accept Captain 200’s evidence that it was no-one from Composite Platoon (Guinness Force).

43.23 In our view there neither was nor could have been believed to be any justification for this firing, which amounted in our view not just to a vicious and unprovoked assault, but one likely to cause significant injury.

43.24 In his NICRA statement,1William John Doherty recorded that he had been photographed “3 or 4 times in the Saracen before being assaulted, and later on again in the barracks ”. In our view the following photograph of him is likely to be one taken before he was taken to Fort George. He stated that he had been photographed before being assaulted, but it seems to us more likely that the photograph was taken after he was taken from the APC and put into an RMP vehicle.2We have found no evidence that suggests to us that he was assaulted after he had come into the custody of the RMP.

1 AD113.2 2AD113.1

43.25 The photograph shows blood on his shirt. This photograph has been cropped and so does not show the whole of his left arm, but since he was clothed, it is not possible to see even from the uncropped photograph whether he had any injury to his left arm.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 22:59

avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 23:00

43.26 Corporal 126 (a member of the Royal Military Police) recorded in his RMP statement1 that he was present when an RMP team, which included himself and Lance Corporal 121, documented Duncan Clark and William John Doherty, apparently while they were still in the area of the Rossville Flats. In his statement to this Inquiry,2 he told us that this process would have involved taking a Polaroid photograph of the arresting soldier and the arrested civilian together. The complete version of the cropped photograph shown above does include Sergeant O. In his statement for the Widgery Inquiry,3 Sergeant O said that the RMP team was in two Land Rovers. In our view the photograph shown above was taken in an RMP Land Rover and not in Lieutenant N’s APC. In his oral evidence to this Inquiry,4 Corporal 126 said that he now had no recollection of Duncan Clark or William John Doherty, or of seeing civilians with the injuries described by either of them, and said that if he had seen such injuries he would have remembered them. It seems to us that while he might well now have no recollection, he could not have failed to notice at the time that these two civilians had sustained injuries.

1 B1778

2 B1782.005
3 B1781

4 Day 359/119-125


43.27 Lance Corporal 121 recorded in his RMP statement,1 and in his statement for the Widgery Inquiry,2 that he was also present when Duncan Clark and William John Doherty were documented. In his written statement to this Inquiry,3 he told us that he no longer remembered them, which may well be the case.

1 B1758

2 B1761
3 B1764.001


43.28 In a written statement made shortly after Bloody Sunday,1 Colonel Wilford, who had (as we discuss elsewhere in this report2) followed the vehicles of Support Company into the Bogside, recorded that just before seeing Major Loden for the first time at the north end of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats, he had a quick word with an RMP arrest team which had arrived to pick up some arrested civilians. He saw two civilians being placed into the back of a Land Rover. They were both bloodied about the head, but otherwise all right. He told the RMP to ensure that the doctor saw them before they were taken off. However, in his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry,3 Colonel Wilford described this conversation as having taken place at a later stage, when he returned to the area after visiting C Company, by which time he said that the RMP had brought up two Land Rovers.

1 B951

2 Chapter 171
3 WT11.46


43.29 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry,1 Corporal 126 agreed that the Land Rovers shown in the following photograph were similar to his team’s vehicles. In our view they were the RMP vehicles.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 23:00

avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 23:00

43.30 In his oral evidence to this Inquiry,1 Colonel Wilford agreed that the figure on the left of this photograph is probably him. This photograph therefore probably shows Colonel Wilford running towards the RMP Land Rovers shortly before his conversation with Corporal 126 and Lance Corporal 121. In his RMP statement,2 Corporal 126 recorded that they had been in the area of the Rossville Flats for about 15 minutes before a Colonel from 1 PARA spoke to them. In these circumstances we consider that Colonel Wilford’s oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry is to be preferred to his written account of meeting the RMP team earlier.

1 Day 321/77 2B1778

43.31 Corporal 126 and Lance Corporal 121 both recorded in their RMP statements,1 and in their statements for the Widgery Inquiry,2 that the Colonel from 1 PARA asked whether they or anyone had been hit by a burst of fire from the flats. However, in his oral evidence to this Inquiry,3 Corporal 126 said that he had no recollection of the conversation about the two civilians described by Colonel Wilford, although he would have called a doctor if he had been told to do so. Neither Duncan Clark nor William John Doherty said anything about receiving medical attention until after reaching Fort George. If Colonel Wilford did give instructions for these civilians to be seen by a doctor before being taken off (which in our view he probably did), for some reason it appears that this was not done.

1 B1778; B1758

2 B1781; B1761
3 Day 359/125-126


43.32 We set out below Duncan Clark’s and William John Doherty’s arrest photographs which were taken at Fort George.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Guest on Thu 17 Jun - 23:01

avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry Volume 3

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum