Who shot Michael Collins.

Good question. I guess they were in shock and believed the story they were told.

Taken from website..

'John M. Feehan’s The Shooting of Michael Collins: Murder or Accident?

What can we actually know about the events that transpired on August 22, 1922? Feehan offers this summary:

• Collins was shot with a bullet from a Mauser type pistol
• We cannot be certain who shot Collins at this time
• Some type of cover-up happened after Collins’s death

First, Feehan contends that Collins was shot with a bullet from a Mauser type pistol. [What is that? It is a weapon made by the German manufacturer Mauser, which was used rather notoriously by at least a few rogue IRA members in the 1920s. Feehan describes it in this way: “The barrel and body of the Mauser pistol are in one piece and it is normally supplied with a wooden holster which can be attached to the grip of the pistol and so turn it into a mini-rifle which can be fired from the shoulder. It usually fires a 7.45 mm or 9 mm bullet which, when it strikes and enters an object, expands and tumbles and can tear the flesh to pieces inside.” If you would like to know more, I would suggest you visit the Mauser Website. If you are less of a gun enthusiast and would just like the bottom line: it’s a weapon that can produce gruesome and terrifying results when used in gruesome and terrifying ways.] The bullet entered through his forehead and blew out the side of his head. It was not a ricocheted bullet and it was not a dum-dum bullet. A ricocheted bullet would make a gash of one to two inches and the bullet would stay inside the head. The IRA had been instructed not to use dum-dum bullets and it is not probable that anyone in the ambush would have disobeyed the order. A dum-dum bullet would have stayed in the head and would have left a wound similar in size to a ricocheted bullet. No bullet was found in Collins’s head and none of the witnesses mentioned that dum-dum bullets were used. Witnesses claim that they did see a small wound on Collins’s forehead and such a wound would be consistent with what a Mauser type pistol would do.

Second, we simply cannot know with certainty who shot Michael Collins. Feehan says it definitely was not Sonny O’Neill, Eamon DeValera or John McPeak. Feehan also says that in an interview, Emmet Dalton admitted that it is possible that he accidentally shot Collins. If indeed Dalton did make such a comment, it does not prove that it was a bullet fired by Dalton that killed Collins and, in fact, the only way to know would be to exhume Michael’s body. In his film diary, Neil Jordan relates a story relating to a supposed diary kept by Emmet Dalton (see the Collins in Love section also). Allegedly, this diary reveals a shocking conspiracy:

"In the diary, the unnameable friend claims, there is an admission that Dalton shot Collins at close range with a Luger pistol. That Dev and Collins had arranged to meet but that radicals in both camps wanted to continue the fight so arranged for both of their executions. Dalton was to kill Collins; Liam Lynch, the head of the Irregulars, was to kill de Valera. Dalton got the opportunity and did it. Liam Lynch didn't, so de Valera survived" (Neil Jordan).

Not surprisingly, this Dalton diary has never been produced and so it is vital to keep a realistic perspective on such a claim. 

Third, a cover-up of some nature took place after Collins’s death. There were no inquests, no enquiries, and no proper autopsy was performed. (Seems a bit odd that nothing official took place, considering that Collins was the Commander-in-Chief of the Free State Army.) For some reason, nearly every document pertaining to Collins’s death has been destroyed or has "disappeared." The cap on display in the National Museum as Collins’s cap cannot be his cap because it is too small. The cap has a red stain on it which is supposed to be blood, but after time, a true blood stain would have turned black. The cap is torn as though a bullet tore it but it was never examined for powder marks and the stain was never tested to see if it was indeed a stain from Collins's blood. There is a story that Collins’s cap was given to Seán Hales as evidence that Collins did not get shot by a ricocheted bullet but that cap has vanished.

Feehan finally concludes that it is not fair to charge anyone with shooting Collins because there just isn’t enough evidence.'

Some say Collins was going to expose a British plant (code name Thorp) in the Government when he returned.

Would have been interesting to see Collins live to an old man. Similar to Dev only dieing in 1972. Someone so prominent in the foundation of the state being alive so relatively recently is mad to think, similar to Tom Barry.

Hop off.

The centenary of Collins' death was never going to be a celebration.

In fairness they're trying something different, it's only half way through. See will we hear anything new.

The 'plant' wasn't exposed. It was said that his papers concerning the matter were destroyed either by the plant or thiose in Government that may have wanted him out of the picture.

I always reckoned Collins had the charisma, political inclination and temperment to become Irelands version of Franco. He was already making decisions as CIC that the government were having to rubber stamp after the fact.

Maybe a De Gaulle or even a Mussolini?