Bloody Sunday inquiry urged to probe Widgery evidence

The Bloody Sunday Inquiry is being asked to look into the possibility that evidence may have been suppressed by staff working on the original Widgery Inquiry.

Barry Macdonald QC raised the subject on day 181 of public hearings of the Inquiry, which has, since 1998, been re-examining the Army killings of 13 men and youths in Derry.

The inquiry has already heard that none of the estimated hundreds of pictures taken by soldiers sent into the Bogside on the day of the shootings (January 30, 1972) have been traced, with a lawyer acting for the Ministry of Defence claiming to the inquiry that the trail has now run cold.

Lawyers acting for the bereaved and injured have repeatedly challenged the disappearance of the pictures and the contents of the cinefilm shot from an Army helicopter, which in the footage before the current hearings ends with the arrival of the first soldiers in the Bogside.

Mr Macdonald, representing the largest group of relatives, referred to the issue as he questioned witness James Porter about how he was treated when he offered tape recordings of Army and Police radio traffic in Derry on Bloody Sunday to the Widgery hearings in March 1972.

Mr Porter said Lord Widgery - then the Lord Chief Justice - spurned the offer with the words: ‘‘I am tired of hearing about your tapes ad nauseum and this inquiry is over.’’

Mr Macdonald said: ‘‘The reason I am raising this with Mr Porter is this: that the question whether evidence before this tribunal has been suppressed is still a live issue. In particular, there is a question about whether or not the evidence about Army photographs and the contents of the cinefilm has been suppressed.

‘‘There is a pending application for this tribunal to have an interlocutory hearing in relation to the concealment, destruction or disappearance in some other way of Army photographs that were taken on the day. There is also a question in relation to the contents of the cinefilm.’’

Mr Macdonald said two people ‘‘directly involved’’ in the issue of the cinefilm were William Smith, secretary to the Widgery Tribunal, and his deputy, David Dewick.

There was some suggestion in other evidence that his legal team had received that Army photographs may not have been seen by members of the tribunal, Mr Macdonald continued.

But he added: ‘‘There is some suggestion that the cinefilm was concealed, or at least stored in a cupboard kept privately in the room of Mr Dewick.

‘‘There are a number of issues that arise in relation to the conduct of the secretariat of the Widgery Tribunal.’’

He added: ‘‘All of these issues bear on the matters that are before this tribunal.

‘‘Before the tribunal can determine the truth of what happened on Bloody Sunday, it has to be known whether or not it has all the evidence about what happened on Bloody Sunday.

"It has to be known whether or not certain matters - I am not making allegations at this stage, sir, I am just exploring the matter - the tribunal has to know whether or not certain people, who are still alive today and may be witnesses before this tribunal, have suppressed evidence or indeed whether they attempted to suppress evidence or intimidate a witness such as Mr Porter or at the very least inhibit him in the production of this material evidence.’’