Omagh trial: Murphy is found guilty

Colm Murphy has become the first person to be convicted in connection with the Omagh bombing.

Colm Murphy has become the first person to be convicted in connection with the Omagh bombing.

Father-of-four Murphy, from Dundalk, Co Louth, has been found guilty of conspiring to cause an explosion likely to endanger life or cause serious injury to property between August 13 and 16, 1998.

Some 29 people, including a woman heavily pregnant with twins, died and hundreds more were injured when the blast tore through the Co Tyrone market town on August 15, 1998.

It was the single worst atrocity in the history of the troubles in Northern Ireland.

Three judges today delivered their verdict in Dublin’s Special Criminal Court after a 25-day trial.

Presiding judge Mr Justice Robert Barr said: ‘‘The accused is a republican terrorist of long standing, having been convicted of a series of offences of this nature in both this state and the United States and having served jail sentences.’’

Murphy showed no reaction as the verdict was delivered. The conviction carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.

During the proceedings, the judges heard that Murphy, a wealthy publican and building contractor, lent two mobile phones to an associate of a suspected high-ranking Real IRA figure planning the bombing.

Murphy’s phone, and that of his foreman and second cousin Terence Morgan, were tracked travelling from Co Louth to Omagh and back again on the day of the bombing.

Mr Morgan initially claimed that Murphy had asked to borrow his mobile phone because his own was ‘‘on the blink’’.

But on the penultimate day of the trial, Mr Morgan withdrew his evidence implicating Murphy.

He said gardai pressurised him into making the allegations. Instead he said he had lost the phone over the weekend and found it in his van the following Monday.

During the trial the court ruled that two detectives - Liam Donnelly and John Fahy - had fabricated evidence against Murphy by adding details to a statement and making alterations.

They were described as ‘‘discredited witnesses’’ in a court ruling, but a defence application to have the case thrown out was rejected, with the judges deciding that the actions of the two officers had not tainted the entire case.

More in this section

Lunchtime News

Newsletter

Get a lunch briefing straight to your inbox at noon daily. Also be the first to know with our occasional Breaking News emails.

Cookie Policy Privacy Policy Brand Safety FAQ Help Contact Us Terms and Conditions

© Examiner Echo Group Limited