Interviewed on BBC Panorama and shown tonight, the Chief Constable referred to “these legacy issues”
Well, I have news for him.
The murders of my parents were crimes. Crimes which his force has failed to solve. Crimes where the papers were put in a box and stored away , probably months after the bomb. The exhibits were destroyed.
My parents were real living victims of crime.
They are not a “legacy”, nor an “issue”.
I suppose I should not be surprised that , having been selected as a safe pair of hands by the state, he trots out the state’s line.
Readers, particularly those who have also lost loved ones might well think [like I do] that George Hamilton’s attitude stinks.
Tucked away at para 1.13.
“It cannot be said with certainty whether the outcomes of these cases would have been different if particular decisions had been taken differently.”
For the layman, imagine Match of the Day and the endless slow motion replays and the blethering of the pundits. “Well, Alan, should he have scored there?”
“Well maybe not Gary, but his decision making has to be in question”
I wonder what the report cost? Is anyone interested?
Today’s ‘Editor’s viewpoint’ , unsurprisingly, misses the point completely. The test for prosecution is not and never was an issue in MC,AA and BB. It does not feature in Starmer’s report.
Study instead Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy and the Peter Principle.
Look at the officials involved in this shambles and ask if they were up to the job.
Ask them what the organisation expected of them. The answer will be ‘stats’.
In my own experience , the high command was not interested in issues about victims, for example , about the evidence of young children , there were no medals for that.
Every organisation is taken over by the bureaucrats and every person in it is promoted beyond his/her level of ability. The PPS is no different.
The items recovered from the scene of the murders of my parents have been disposed of.
Is that a shocking statement? You might think so.
The police cannot tell me when they were disposed of, why and on whose orders.
The items are therefore not available for testing by techniques which were used as far back as 1998.
Of course, if the bombers were State agents, it would be inconvenient to have their DNA found on the bomb.
I have written ,again, to the Chief Constable, requesting an explanation.
If the Protestant/Unionist/loyalist faction have not got the message yet [ yes and you too Willy!] let me spell it out.
The State is protecting a swathe of terrorists , republican and loyalist, for the greater good of the “peace process”. The “Crown” is not our friend, any more than it is the enemy of republicans.
Good people like my parents were sacrificed because the State deemed it appropriate.
There are hundreds of similar families suffering. For example the “human bomb” families of Derry, operations ordered by McGuinness.
I will share the Chief Constable’s response.
Next time- the UCBT teams, what the police knew and what they did about them.
On 7th january, oul Grandpa McGuinness, he of the folksy charm, tweeted “Today’s attack in Paris was appalling”.
This from a man who ordered many similar attacks. How many defenceless policemen did his comrades kill?
If you repeat a lie often enough..
Also, if the French Government is as brave as the British, it will already be negotiating with the terrorists.
Despite the demonstrations and the words, when the dust settles in Paris , the victims will be discarded by the state and will be left to the silence.
It will be interesting to assess French foreign policy in the coming months.
Meantime David Cameron is, in respect of toughness towards Islamic terrorists, [as they say in Texas] Big Hat no cattle.
My parents were killed by an under car booby trap bomb [UCBT], the sort of device that cowards use, [directed by Martin McGuinness], in the “war” where they couldn’t lawfully be shot, because it wasn’t a war, if you see what I mean.
I was told by ACC Harris that fifteen UCBTs were recovered intact. He informed me that as a result of a SCRT review, “a senior scientist has concluded that although the bombs were similar in their make up , they had subtle differences and could not be attributed to a single bomb maker.”
I asked Forensic Science Northern Ireland for a copy of the report. They replied, on 12 November:
“FSNI examined a number of devices during the period 1990 to 1992 however these were not correlated into any single report that we hold or have access to in our files”.
I wrote a FOI request to the police on the same day, asking
1. When the conclusion was reached by the “senior scientist”.
2. The name of the “senior scientist”.
3. The organisation for whom the “senior scientist” worked.
I also asked for a copy of the report which provided the basis for ACC Harris’s assertion
The PSNI say that “a response should be sent to you within twenty working days. Twenty eight working days later there is no reply, and no response to a follow up email to them. I am hoping, that this assertion by ACC Harris has more foundation than his statement about Ed Moloney.
Handler: “Denis , the big bosses want an update. Who is on the Army Council at present?
Denis: “Gerry, Pat Doherty, head of intelligence; Joe Cahill, Martin McGuinness, Kevin McKenna, Mickey McKevitt and Slab.”
Handler: “Great, and is McGuinness still head of Northern Command?”
In Policing the Shadows, by Holland and Phoenix, a book written posthumously about Ian Phoenix, who was in RUC Special Branch, the authors state at page 215: “most of the information gathered on the paramilitaries and their links lay idle in police files and was never exploited”
Moral of the story: a succession of Chief Constables ignored [or were instructed to ignore] the activities of PIRA senior figures because of the “peace process”. Alternatively, McGuinness was “the Fisherman” a tout and therefore untouchable. As one commentator has said, why sacrifice Donaldson at the time of the Stormont arrests unless the State had higher placed informants?