Preamble. Introduction Could I first thank this committee for the opportunity to air this injustice. My name is Jim Kelly and I come from the Falls Road area of West Belfast. I shall speak to you on behalf of my son Sean Kelly and his co-accused, Pat Kane and Michael Timmons. Our sons were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for their alleged involvement in the tragic deaths of two British Army soldiers serving in Northern Ireland. Background information. May I now take this opportunity to focus on the event which entails my attendance at this Congressional hearing today. On the 19th March, 1988 a funeral was proceeding peacefully along the Andersonstown road in West Belfast enroute to the Milltown Cemetery. During the course of this event a car, containing two men and travelling at speed, drove into the funeral cortege - this happened on the Andersonstown Road outside the gates of Casement Park - a GAA sports stadium. In a state of surprise and shock some of those present believed the funeral was coming under attack from armed Loyalists and reacted accordingly. The car was stopped and an attempt was made to drag the occupants from the car during which one of them discharged a handgun2. From this point on a mood approaching mass hysteria broke out. The two men were dragged from their vehicle and pushed into Casement Park 3 and the car, which some thought might contain a bomb, was driven away. This was to clear a path for the funeral to proceed. The men were held in the park for a few minutes after which they were put into the back of a taxi and driven away. The taxi travelled via a number of side streets and eventually came to a stop at waste ground beside an alley known as 'Penny Lane'. Here a fight took place between the occupants of the car and their captors. The fight was still taking place when one of the captors shot first one soldier then the other. This man handed the gun to another who in turn shot both soldiers as they lay on the ground. The killings were later claimed by the Irish Republican Army. It later transpired the two men were in fact British Army soldiers, dressed in civilian clothing and driving an unmarked car. To understand why the mourners reacted in the way they did it is important to examine the sequence of events leading up to that fateful day. 1 See 'Appendix 1' for the British Government analysis of the environment in which the funeral was taking place. 2 3 For a graphic illustration of the tension which existed between the mourners and the two 'Appendix 3' provides a location map of the scene of these incidents. Events prior to 19th March 1988. The 'Mad Month of March' as it has become known was a particularly traumatic period for the Nationalist people of West Belfast. On the 6th of March three Republicans from West Belfast were shot dead by British undercover soldiers from the Special Air Services (or the SAS). The shooting happened on the holiday island of Gibraltar. The three dead were all from West Belfast. They were Mairead Farrell, a 31 year old woman, Sean Savage, aged 24 years of age and Daniel McCann, a 30 year old married man. The ruthless manner in which they died caused world wide controversy and this controversy was reinforced when it later emerged that none of the three were armed when shot. The people of West Belfast viewed the deaths as a form of summary execution. Rioting erupted in Nationalist areas on a scale not witnessed for many years and continued for a number of days. After an acrimonious delay on behalf of the authorities the bodies of the deceased were eventually returned to Belfast and the funerals took place on the 16th March. Furthermore, on the 15th March, on the night the bodies were expected home, another Republican, Kevin McCracken, was shot dead by the British Army. The shooting occurred close to the home of Sean Savage - one of the three people killed in Gibraltar. Around the same time another Catholic, Charlie McGrillen was shot dead by Loyalist paramilitaries. On the 16th March thousands of people turned out for the joint funerals of Mairead Farrell, Daniel McCann and Sean Savage. As the last of the bodies was lowered into the grave a Loyalist paramilitary launched a grenade and gun attack on the defenceless mourners 5. The result of that attack in Miltown Cemetery was another three men shot dead - John McErlane, Tommy Murray and Kevin Brady and 68 mourners, including women and children, injured. At great risk to themselves mourners at the procession gave chase and captured the Loyalist attacker. Yet again the people of West Belfast faced another round of funerals of victims of violence. The last man to be buried was Kevin Brady and it was into this funeral the two British soldiers were to drive their car. It was little wonder the mourners instinctively reacted the way they did to what they perceived to be another attack on a funeral. 5 A series of tragic and violent events occurred during the month of March 1988 many of which were linked to the deaths of three people in Gibraltar by British soldiers. For a list of these This indiscriminate attack was on men women and children attending the funeral of the 6 7 8 Importance of the background information The reason why I explain the background in some detail is that build up influenced the mood, atmosphere and general feeling of apprehension felt by most of the mourners at that point in time. This should be compared to the Trial Judge in his 70 page written judgement who only refers to the background scenario in passing in fact only allotting three lines to its significance. It is our honest belief our sons did not receive a fair trial and below are a number of reasons which we believe support our claim. (a) Our sons were tried before a non jury, one Judge, Diplock Court. In this type of court the Judge becomes his own witness. (b) The Judge allowed the use of hidden witnesses. These witnesses were identified as A, B, or C etc. and gave evidence from behind a curtain hidden from the defendants and the public'. (c) The Judge used articles 3 and 4 on the right of silence against the defendants. The defendants felt compelled to take the stand and their testimony was then used against them. In Sean's case, on advice from his Legal Counsel, he declined to take the stand and that refusal was then also used as added weigh of evidence. (d) The defence was denied Equality of Arms. After protracted appeals to the Court and the Law Society the defence was given a U-matic video player and monitor to view the tapes. In contrast, the DPP had at its disposal hi-tec projectors and multi-banks of monitors. The images were shown on a large screen 10 feet by 7 feet. Their expert operator could freeze each frame an play the same forward or backward at very slow and normal speed. In fact, it was only after the trial that it was discovered the side panel of the U-matic monitor used by the defence was a touch control panel for sound etc. (e) The video evidence, when it was used for identification, was misused. Without the knowledge of or consent from the defence the Heli-teli was colour enhanced. An arrow was placed over a blurry image which the Crown alleged was the accused. Set pieces of film were played over and over at slow and normal speeds, backward and forward for hours on end in what could best be described as a form of brainwashing. (f) Earlier court decisions excluded the uses of psychological evidence. The Judge commented that he was "in as good a position as anyone to evaluate the men's behaviour". N.B. It is the combined reasons stated above which we believe justify our claim of an unfair trial. For information on the implementation of the Diplock courts and their significance in this case For information on how hidden witnesses affected the atmosphere of the court please see For background information and on and the implications of Articles 3 and 4 in this case please When we asked for these cases to be referred to the Court of Appeal that request was refused. We were told we needed new evidence or something of substance for a referral to be granted. New evidence I respectfully submit a list of new evidence which the authorities say is not enough. 1. Psychological report on the mental age of Pat Kane. This suggests Pat Kane has a mental age of a twelve year old. 2. Medical report from Dr. Joe Hendron, M.P., on the hearing disability of Pat Kane. This would suggest he should have had advisors during the Police interviews. 3. Statement from school teacher Fergus O'Hare. This places Sean Kelly on the outside of Casement Park when the park gates are closed and the soldiers are presumably inside the Park. 4. Statement from Jim Kelly, father of Sean, which places Sean half a mile away from Penny Lane, the scene of the fatal shooting of the soldiers. 5. Submissions on the men's behalf by the American Alliance of Lawyers, submissions made by the Committee of Administration of Justice, submissions made by Amnesty International, submissions made by Kevin McNamara M.P. and former shadow spokesperson for Northern Ireland. 6. Opinion by Mr Peter Thornton, Q.C., Barrister. This opinion undermines the use of the use of the murder charge and the misuse of the law, especially the principle of Common Purpose. 7. Report from Professor Andrew Coleman - expert in the psychology of crowd behaviour. 8. The British Broadcasting Corporation 'Rough Justice Programme'. This BBC documentary highlights major differences between the Court's interpretation of events and that of the video evidence i.e Pat Kane was alleged to have removed the Priest From Casement Park. This was clearly shown not to be the truth. When weighing the strength of the new evidence there are a few facts which must be given full consideration. Remember. 1. None of the accused knew each other; 2. None were members or even alleged members of any paramilitary or political group. 3. None attended Penny Lane - the scene of the fatal shooting; 4. The charged atmosphere of that day was not taken into account i.e. the combined effect of the Gibraltar Three killings by the British Army and the Milltown Cemetery gun and grenade attack by Loyalists. 5. The two essential ingredients necessary for a guilty verdict in relation to 'Aiding and Abetting Murder' or of 'Common Enterprise' are missing: (i) There was no hint of premeditation and, (ii) There was no meeting of minds. Humanitarian aspects When the Committee is considering this injustice we would ask them to include some humanitarian aspects. The denial of the three men's freedom via their continuing, unjust imprisonment speaks for itself. The heartbreak felt by the families when we leave our sons behind is real and hurtful. Sean Kelly has a daughter, our first grandchild. For a couple of years we have watched her grow and we grew to love her with a passion. After a while Sean's partner met and married someone else and for a number of years Sean, the proud father and we, the doting grandparents, were heartbroken. Recently our grand daughter's mother relented and now we see Colleen at least once a week. During his time in prison Sean lost his last two grandparents. (His grand father Kelly and his grand mother Stevenson). We are a very close family and the loss cuts deep. Prior to his imprisonment Pat Kane was engaged to be married and making plans for his future. That relationship could not withstand the separation and broke up. Pat's parents are both frail and elderly and the campaign on their son's behalf has affected the health of both of them. Both are deeply religious and belong to a number of cross-community groups. Pat was their last son living at home and they had grown to rely on him. Michael Timmons is a married man with five children. It would bring tears to a stone to watch them kiss goodbye after a family visit. His wife, Laura, has had to struggle hard to make ends meet while he is in prison. His children have grown and at times have made their First Holy Communions and Confirmations - both important events in the life of young Catholics. Michael's mother and father are pensioners and Michael's father is in very poor health so much so he can no longer go to the prison to visit his only son. We submit this injustice to you in the hope that after careful consideration the Committee can embrace our call for justice. The families of Sean, Pat and Michael realise that on our own we are but voices in the wilderness. As long as the authorities could keep us inside the restrictive boundaries of Northern Ireland they could just ignore us. Please do not underestimate this committee's power to influence both the Northern Ireland Office and the British Government. On behalf of Sean, Pat and Michael and their families I would like to thank you for listening. This injustice can and should be addressed. We believe tackling this will not cause any conflict across the religious or political divide. Once again I thank you for taking the time to listen. |