The Arrest
Background:
I was stopped by a single Paratrooper soldier at about 1.40pm on 5 June 1991 as I walked through the linking alleyway between Suffolk Road and Kerrykeel Gardens, Belfast. The Crown alleged that Corporal Blacklock had stopped me and ordered me to remove my hands from my pockets, and when I did so, it was alleged that I produced from my pocket with my right ungloved hand a glass coffee-jar bomb. Corporal Blacklock then claimed that he instructed me to place the bomb on a low brick wall to my right hand side of the alleyway. Nine months after my arrest a second Soldier was then said to have observed the Corporal stop and instruct me to remove the jar from my pocket and place it on the wall.
Despite all the forensic evidence overwhelmingly supporting my innocence the Trial Judge stated that, “the forensic evidence did not assist the Crown”. In doing so he reduced the case to that of my word against the word of the two main prosecution witnesses.
In March 2000, the Criminal Cases Review Commission referred my case back to the Court of Appeal on grounds of the Soldiers new statements and additional other new evidence. Under the Criminal Appeal Act the CCRC can only make a referral if it believes a conviction is unsafe.
In 1998 both soldiers were re-interviewed by Sir Jeff Hunt of the London Metropolitan Police on behalf of Sir Ronnie Flanagan, former Chief Constable of the RUC. This was done in accordance with the Criminal Appeal Act. Private Boyce retracted his trial testimony after it was established to be false. Both soldiers disclosed that they had been 'coached' prior to my trial. The Court of Appeal in 2002 refused to consider the soldiers new statements on grounds that it was improper for 'defence solicitors' to have re-interviewed them. This was in disregard to the Criminal Appeal Act. The Soldiers new statements have gone unconsidered by any appeal court and so remain relevant and available. In January 2007 the Court of Appeal ruled that this evidence had been dismissed "out of hand" by the earlier court. Private Boyce has refused the current Appeal Courts' recent request that he come before it and explain himself. My case is currently awaiting a fresh appeal.
In January 2002, the Criminal Appeal Court handed down its Judgment referring to the CCRC as "defence solicitors" the Court stated that it would not consider the Soldiers new statements thus removing a major part of my defence.
Additional New Evidence:
On 2nd February 2009, it was discovered that another man (described as a "top IRA man" by Dr Griffin) had been arrested in connection to the coffee jar device. This man was arrested 15 minutes before I arrived at the scene establishing that I could not have had the device in my pocket. The device was at the scene before my arrival. However, shortly after my arrest, and before allegations that I had had the jar in my coat pocket, an RUC officer (Adrian Smith, extension 25761) asked Dr Griffin to measure my coat pockets to see if the jar would fit in any? Dr Griffin confirmed that it would. The other man was released and his presence at the scene also was concealed from me for almost 18 years. It should be noted, however, that this other man may also have been unconnected to the device; his significance is proof that the device was at the scene at least 15 minutes before I was.
This evidence comes on top of other fresh facts; among them that two other Forensic Experts gave false testimony in attempt to bolster the case against me.
Further, in order to convict me, the Trial Judge drew an adverse inference against me for remaining silent while under interrogation after my arrest. In 2001 the Court of Appeal was presented with copies of my signed statements made while under interrogation which compelled the Court to find that the Trial Judge was not "justified" for his 'main criticism' and basis for convicting me.
The following reconstuction images are based upon the evidence given by the Prosecution's Military Witnesses.
The above image is a google earth view of the scene modified to reflect the testimonies of Corporal Blacklock, Private Eames and Private Whillis. Corporal Blacklock and Privates Whillis and Eames, all testified that the patrol had approached the alleyway while in ‘brick’ formation traveling up along the Suffolk Road. By “brick formation” they mean that their patrol was spaced and staggered with two men on either side of the road. The image above indicates the position each soldier was in as they approached the alleyway. (Pages 94, 137-8, 178, 233-5 & 239-40 of Trial Transcript)
Corporal Blacklocks Testimony (pages 94-95 Trial Transcript).
Q.60. And what way did you make your way up the Suffolk Road? What way was your team split up?
A. There were two men on either side of the road.
Q61. And who was on the right hand side going up?
A. Me, your honour. (Page 94 Trial Transcripts)
Q69. Boyce was on your side you are saying. Is that what you are saying? Yes.
Q70. And then Whillis? A. Whillis and Eames were on the other side, your honour. (Page 95 Trial Transcripts)
Private Boyce, in contradiction of his own testimony and that of the other members of his patrol claimed that the Patrol approached from a gateway almost directly opposite from the alleyway. This, in theory, allowed him a clear view of the area where the encounter took place. (Pages 167, 180-88 & 192).
Corporal Blacklock Testimony (Page 99 Trial Transcripts) [see Prosecution Page regarding missing Photographs of the jar on the wall]
Q107. Why did you stop him?
A. As he was walking up the alleyway he just looked suspicious.
Q108. THE JUDGE: He just looked suspicious.
Q132. So let us just get it clear. Yesterday you said that he looked at you; this morning you say that he did not look at you and you change that to say that he looked at you and now you say that you do not know whether he looked at you or not, is that right?
A. Yes, your honour.
Q. And where did he set it down?
A. He placed it on the wall where the railings are. (Pages 58, 110 -126 Trial Transcripts)
Q. What happened when he set the device on the wall?
A. I pushed him up against the fence.
Q. Was that the railings or the wooden fence?
a. The wooden fence.
Q. And what happened then?
A. I called up – the rest of my team came up to see what was going on.
Q. where were the rest of your team or do you recall where any of the members of your team were while this was going on at any stage?
A. They were behind me, round the corner. (Page 59 Trial Transcripts)
The position was critical if anyone outside of, and not level with, the alleyway could plausibly claim to have seen Corporal Blacklock stop me.
Q294. It could not have been there?
A. No.
Q295. I am now pointing to the elbow in the wall and you are definite about that?
A. Yes. (Page 117 Trial Transcripts)
Q299. That it was sitting there. Did you ever see it sitting there?
A. No.
Q300. Are you sure?
A. Yes.
Q301. You rule that out entirely?
A. Yes, in my mind—
Q302. THE JUDGE: You rule it out entirely?
A. Yes.
Q303. And then what did you say?
A. To my mind I recollect that he put it down where I have marked, your honour. (Page 117 Trial Transcripts.)
Q381. MR MOONEY: Do you still adhere to your earlier evidence or do you say that you are mistaken about the position of the jar?
A. Yes, I was mistaken.
Q383. THE JUDGE: The witness now agrees that he was mistaken in pointing out the position of the jar on wall, is that right?
A. Yes, your honour. (Page 126 Trial Transcripts )
Private Boyce’s Testimony: (Pages 173 -175 Trial Transcripts.)
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR MOONEY.
Q833. MR MOONEY: Private Boyce, whereabouts on the wall was it put down?
A. I cannot say exactly. It was just put on the wall.
Q841. MR MOONEY: It is a very important matter and I want you to apply your mind to it and just do not say that you do not remember.
A. Wherever it is placed on the photograph that is where it was placed. It was not moved it after he placed it as it appears on the photograph, your honour.
Q842. Just before you looked at the photograph what was that again?
A. Wherever it is placed, wherever it is in that photograph I agree that is where it was placed in the first place.
Q843. Well do you know where it is in the photograph.
Q844. Do you know where it is in the photograph?
A. Am I allowed to have a look?
Corporal Blacklock conceeded that his testimony had been wrong
Q. Well can you tell the court how it is that if you are mistaken about that you were able to tell the court this morning that the jar was definitely, and you were definite on this, in the position that you have marked?
A. To my mind at the time I thought that where I marked on the photograph was where the device was put down.
Corporal Blacklock’s Testimony: (Pages 141, 150-151 Trial Transcripts)
Q537. Were you holding the accused when Boyce entered the alleyway?
A. Yes
Q538. Had you him up against the wall?
A. The fence, your honour.
Q539. You had him up against the fence?
A. Yes.
Q540. You had the accused up against the fence when Boyce entered the alleyway, is that right?
A. Yes, your honour.
Q729. Well if he (Private Boyce) was round the corner or if he only came into the alley after what has been described as your sequence and he came from behind you round the corner as you have said I suggest to you that he could not have seen it, that he could not have seen the object in his hand. What do you say to that?
A. If he was round the corner, no, he would not have seen it.
Q628. But as far as you can say he came round the corner?
A. Yes.
Q629. And you told then I suggest to you or you nodded towards the thing on the wall and you said that you had caught this man with it or something like that?
A. No, your honour.
…
Q633. I am suggesting to you that you said something to Boyce along the lines that this man had produced the item which was on the wall; or I think that the words that I had used earlier were that you said that you had caught him with it or something to that effect, do you follow me?
Yes, I follow you, but I cannot remember saying that, your honour.
What Boyce Saw:
Private Boyce testified that he only arrived on the scene after the sequence of events described by Corporal Blacklock, and myself (setting aside my alleged possession); Boyce’s evidence was that the patrol had approached the alleyway from a gateway directly opposite from the alleyway. (ages 167, 180-188 & 192 of Trial Transcript) In accepting Private Boyce’s account that he was across the road and not around the corner as Corporal Blacklock and I had testified, then the Judge was elevating Boyce’s account to be the more credible.
Q898. MR. MOONEY: Now just take your time. There is no hurry about this because I want to get it right.
A. There is a gate which does not show up on the map here. There is a gate which is almost opposite the alleyway. That is the gate that we emerged out from.(Page 180) (location of gate post still visible to right of photograph below)
“Q1033. Yes where were Blacklock and the defendant when you first saw them?
A. To the right at the fence side.
…
Q1038. And the defendant, what about him?
A. His back was against the fence most of the time. (Page 194)
Private Boyce’s testimony is confusing if not physically impossible; (Page 197 of Trial Transcripts.)
Q1057. I am sorry, what was that?
A, I said that most of his body was obscured by Corporal Blacklock’s body but he was just there. I don’t know what Corporal Blacklock said to him, he had the coffee jar.
Q1059. Well your view of him was obscured to some extent isn’t that right?
A. The lower trunk of his body.
Q1060. Was obscured?
A. Yes
Q1061. That is by Blacklock?
A. Yes your honour.
Q1062. The lower part of his body is that right?
A. That is correct your honour.
Q1063. Not the top part of his body?
A. No
Q1064. Why, was Blacklock crouching down?
A. No
Q1065. Well how is it that only the bottom half of his body was obscured?
A. I could see the top half of his shoulders and the hand out, that is what I saw, your honour. Because in my position on the road I was more over to the left so that I could see part of his right hand and part of the body, but part of his body was obviously obscured by Corporal Blacklock, your honour.
Q1066. So just what did you see then, did you see the tops, you saw the top of his shoulders, is that right?
A. Part of his right-hand side and obviously his legs your honour.
Q1067. And that is all?
A. And his head, and his face your honour, his right hand.
Q1068. That is all, is that right?
A. Yes that is correct your honour.
Q1069 You did not see his left hand?
A. I cannot recall your honour.