A senior barrister has rounded on the Public Prosecution Service over delays in the case of the attempted murder of former DCI John Caldwell, branding the latest update “vacuous and meaningless”.
During tense exchanges at Omagh Magistrates’ Court, District Judge Conor Heaney stopped short of proceeding to fix for committal but noted, “The PPS needs to strain its sinews to get this moving.”
The now-retired senior officer was shot whilst coaching a youth football team at a sports complex in Omagh on 22 February, 2023, in an attack claimed by the New IRA.
Originally eight men were charged with attempted murder, however, as the case reached the three year mark, the charges against one of the accused were dramatically dropped.
The case is continuing against the remaining seven, along with nine others who face various charges relating to terrorism and perverting justice,
For over a year defence lawyers have raised concerns over delay and whilst appreciating the complexities of such a huge matter, have requested papers are shared in the cases of those defendants whose charges have been directed upon.
This was to allow defence lawyers to begin work which they are currently unable to do, however the PPS have refused to accede to this, insisting all cases must remain together and be supplied at the same time.
But this also drew criticism as the dropping of charges against one defendant clearly required a decision to be made, and the defence argued this could be applied in relation to at least some of the accused.
On Tuesday, the PPS were to provide an update and progress as well as a timescale and counsel stated, “Some decisions have been taken in principle, so we are not starting from scratch. We are looking at ways to most efficiently serve evidence on the defence and while it wouldn’t usually be the case, the police are involved to assist this process. There has been a significant amount of work done and the outstanding files are now being integrated.”
District Judge Conor Heaney stated, “The court needs to know much more about this. Clear progress is required in the interests of the defendants but also witnesses whose recollections will fade over time and for the complainant. I’m now told there is a decision in some cases but not others. The court needs to closely supervise this.”
Responding to this defence counsel, Eoghan Devlin KC branded the PPS position as “a non-update update”, adding. This court was anxious to obtain some sort of timescale. Instead, we have a (PPS) message claiming ‘we’re doing lots of work’. That’s the same message they’ve been giving for months. The update is entirely vacuous and meaningless. It also flies in the face of the action taken on one defendant having the charges withdrawn.”
Picking up on the PPS comments on decisions taken ‘in principle for some cases’, Mr Devlin enquired, “Does that mean when this court was told decisions had been taken files read last year, that wasn’t the case? If so, this court has been led a merry dance. There isn’t even a rudimentary timescale. We were told the delay was due to new defendants being added. In actual fact the files are not ready. The court was never informed of that before. It’s contrary to the impression created.”
Defence solicitor Michael Fahy echoed these comments and requested the court “grab this case by the horns and fix a committal date. If the PPS cannot meet that, the directing officer should attend to advise why.”
Judge Heaney adjourned the matter until March 31, warning, “The court expects a substantial update. The PPS needs to strain its sinews to get this moving.”
