The Way this Trial of a Former Soldier Over Bloody Sunday Ended in Acquittal
January 30th, 1972 is remembered as one of the deadliest – and consequential – days during three decades of conflict in this area.
Throughout the area where it happened – the memories of the tragic events are visible on the walls and etched in people's minds.
A public gathering was held on a chilly yet clear day in the city.
The march was challenging the practice of detention without trial – imprisoning people without trial – which had been put in place in response to three years of violence.
Military personnel from the elite army unit shot dead multiple civilians in the Bogside area – which was, and remains, a strongly Irish nationalist area.
A specific visual became notably iconic.
Pictures showed a Catholic priest, Father Daly, displaying a blood-stained cloth while attempting to shield a crowd transporting a young man, Jackie Duddy, who had been killed.
Journalists captured much footage on the day.
Documented accounts includes Fr Daly telling a journalist that troops "appeared to discharge weapons randomly" and he was "absolutely certain" that there was no provocation for the discharge of weapons.
The narrative of events was rejected by the first inquiry.
The first investigation determined the Army had been fired upon initially.
In the negotiation period, the administration set up a fresh examination, following pressure by surviving kin, who said the first investigation had been a whitewash.
That year, the conclusion by the investigation said that on balance, the military personnel had fired first and that none of the casualties had posed any threat.
The then head of state, David Cameron, apologised in the Parliament – stating deaths were "unjustified and unacceptable."
Authorities commenced examine the events.
An ex-soldier, known as the defendant, was prosecuted for homicide.
He was charged over the fatalities of the first individual, twenty-two, and in his mid-twenties William McKinney.
The accused was further implicated of attempting to murder several people, other civilians, further individuals, Michael Quinn, and an unnamed civilian.
Exists a judicial decision maintaining the defendant's privacy, which his lawyers have argued is required because he is at danger.
He told the Saville Inquiry that he had solely shot at people who were possessing firearms.
The statement was rejected in the official findings.
Evidence from the examination would not be used straightforwardly as evidence in the legal proceedings.
In the dock, the defendant was screened from view with a protective barrier.
He addressed the court for the initial occasion in the hearing at a session in December 2024, to answer "innocent" when the charges were put to him.
Relatives of the victims on that day travelled from the city to the courthouse daily of the proceedings.
A family member, whose relative was fatally wounded, said they understood that listening to the case would be painful.
"I can see everything in my recollection," he said, as we walked around the key areas discussed in the case – from the location, where Michael was fatally wounded, to the adjacent the courtyard, where one victim and another victim were died.
"It even takes me back to my position that day.
"I assisted with my brother and lay him in the medical transport.
"I relived each detail during the evidence.
"Notwithstanding experiencing the process – it's still worthwhile for me."
