Getting justice for Bloody Sunday labelled 'Crime of the Century'

riffmongous

The prosecution of 'Soldier F' over the Bloody Sunday massacre has been described as "one of the crimes of the century" by the organiser of a protest set to bring parts of central London to a standstill.

Gavin Wragg, who was behind a similar protest in April, spoke as former servicemen and their supporters converged on Whitehall to form a human chain around Westminster on Saturday.

Soldier F, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is the only person from the 1st Battalion Parachute Regiment ever to face trial for the deaths of 13 civil rights protesters and one passerby in Londonderry in January 1972.

He is charged with the murder of William McKinney, 27, and 22-year-old James Wray, and the attempted murder of four other men - Joseph Friel, Michael Quinn, Joe Mahon and Patrick O'Donnell.

He faces a final charge of "attempted murder of a person or persons unknown".

The Saville Report, an inquiry set up by Tony Blair in 1998 and which published its findings in 2010, also found Soldier F to have killed two other men - Bernard McGuigan, 41, and 31-year-old Patrick Doherty.

The inquiry found Mr Wray had been shot in the back while fleeing and that he was shot a second time as he lay dying, while Mr McKinney was also shot in the back.

Soldier F learned he was to be prosecuted in March of this year and the case is currently in its preliminary stages in Northern Ireland, and the decision by the Northern Irish authorities sparked outrage in Britain.

By 10.30am on Saturday morning around 500 people with flags and "support Soldier F" t-shirts had gathered in Trafalgar Square, with the march due to set off for Westminster at 12pm.

https://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/soldier-f-prosecution-one-of-the-crimes-of-the-century-says-protest-organiser-38542583.html

NIMAN

I like his logic.

Wonder would it be a bigger crime that standing with a high powered rifle and murdering people running away from you?

riffmongous

NIMAN wrote: »

I like his logic.

Wonder would it be a bigger crime that standing with a high powered rifle and murdering people running away from you?

As long as they're in a British uniform they can do whatever they want it seems

Gatling

Wonder how strong the actual evidence is against (F ) for the killings .

riffmongous

Gatling wrote: »

Wonder how strong the actual evidence is against (F ) for the killings .

Well he was named by the last inquiry

The Saville Inquiry stated that there was "no doubt" Soldier F had shot Patrick Doherty (31), a father-of-six who was unarmed.

Lord Saville also found there was "no doubt" Soldier F had shot an unarmed Bernard McGuigan (41) as he went to the aid of Mr Doherty, waving a white handkerchief.

Soldier F admitted at the inquiry he had shot Michael Kelly (17), saying he had only fired at people with bombs or weapons – but Lord Saville concluded Mr Kelly was unarmed.

The inquiry found both Mr McKinney (27) and Mr Wray (22) could have been shot by Soldier F and three other soldiers.

Its report also stated that Soldier F had changed his story over the years.

Edit: Wait hold on, seems the inquiry is inadmissable

The PPS on the other hand found “there is a reasonable prospect of conviction of Soldier F” for two murders and two attempted murders.

The PPS said that the paratroopers reported for the potential death of John Johnston (55) and the wounding of 15-year-old Damien Donaghy near William Street were Soldier A and Soldier B. It said that neither individual posed a threat but “there was no reasonable prospect of proving to the criminal standard, based on the evidence available to the prosecution, that the soldiers may not have believed that there was a threat that justified them having fired”.

The paratroopers linked by Lord Saville to the killing of Jackie Duddy (17) and the wounding and injuring of six others in the car park at the front of the Rossville flats were Soldiers N, O, Q, R, S and V. Here the PPS said a “fundamental difficulty in relation to this sector was in attributing responsibility for the various casualties to particular soldiers”.

Six people died at the rubble barricade on Rossville Street – Michael Kelly (17), Hugh Gilmour (17), William Nash (19), John Young (17), Michael McDaid (20) and Kevin McElhinney (17). Soldier F again was in the frame for these killings along with Soldiers J, K, M, P, U and Soldier 039.

Again based on the admissible evidence the PPS judged there were difficulties in determining individual responsibility for some of the killings and that more generally there was no reasonable prospect of prosecution.

Here Soldier F was reported to have been connected to the killing of Michael Kelly, brother of John Kelly one of the main campaigners and spokespeople for the Bloody Sunday families. The PPS found that there was “no admissible and credible witness evidence that Soldier F fired at the rubble barricade” notwithstanding that the bullet recovered from Michael Kelly’s body was linked to a rifle used by Soldier F.

Soldier F also was implicated in the killings of Bernard “Barney” McGuigan 41) and Patrick Doherty (32) and the wounding of two other men at the rear of the Rossville flats. Lord Saville said that he was “in no doubt” that Soldier F shot Mr McGuigan and Mr Doherty. Evidence from the inquiry was inadmissible to the prosecution and the PPS said that the difficulty was “that the only evidence capable of identifying the soldier who fired the relevant shots came from Soldier F’s co-accused, Soldier G, who is deceased”.

Lord Saville’s inquiry found that deceased Soldier G was responsible for the killings of Gerard McKinney (35) and Gerald Donaghey (17) in Abbey Park. The PPS said that careful consideration was given as to whether Soldier H and, again, Soldier F, could be prosecuted “on the basis that they intentionally assisted or encouraged this shooting”.

It ruled, “However the link between their conduct and the actions of Soldier G was too remote to allow criminal charges to be brought. Furthermore, there was no admissible evidence as to exactly what they were doing at the relevant time.”

Gatling

riffmongous wrote: »

Well he was named by the last inquiry

I know that ,but I mean actual physical evidence.

One seems to be a definite , the others might be more difficult in front of a judge and legal teams

riffmongous

Gatling wrote: »

I know that ,but I mean actual physical evidence.

One seems to be a definite , the others might be more difficult in front of a judge and legal teams

I edited in above what I found online

topmanamillion

I wonder would those same cretens be forming human chains around Westminster if he'd shot unarmed British people on the streets of London.
All life is valuable just some more valuable than others.

lola85

Every republican and Britain soldier needs to be prosecuted and put back in jail.

Only then will all this end.

Can’t be one rule for one and different for the other.

riffmongous

lola85 wrote: »

Every republican and Britain soldier needs to be prosecuted and put back in jail.

Only then will all this end.

Can’t be one rule for one and different for the other.

There isn't though. The GF was a pardon for those in prison, not a general amnesty. If the British Army had faced up to its crimes at the time instead of covering them up, then they would have been free for release too

pablo128

Gatling wrote: »

I know that ,but I mean actual physical evidence.

One seems to be a definite , the others might be more difficult in front of a judge and legal teams

Whatever evidence is available will be put before a judge and jury. Let them decide.