Documents prove military lied about killings

Posted by Jim on September 30, 2017

 

Fresh inquests have been sought into the deaths of two IRA Volunteers in
separate incidents in 1972 and 1973 after documents emerged which
confirmed that the men were unlawfully killed by British soldiers.

Recently uncovered British military archives show that an IRA volunteer
shot dead by the British army in 1972 was the victim of a planned
ambush.

Daniel McAreavey was shot and killed by British soldiers at the junction
of Bosnia Street and Plevna Street in the lower Falls area. Local
witnesses at the time stated that the 21-year-old was wounded and then
executed.

The British military claimed that one of their units happened to be
passing when they were fired upon by a gunman and that they then engaged
with him. However, a classified file from the 2nd Battalion of the
Anglian Regiment states that Mr McAreavey was caught in an “area ambush”
which is military parlance for a kill zone.

A record for October 6, 1972 read: “Area ambush in Raglan Street –
Plevana St – Osman St Daniel McAreavey shot dead and 2 gunmen wounded by
SF. (Security Forces).

Ciaran MacAirt of the Paper Trail organisation, who found the archives
said: “This is an admission by the British Army that Daniel McAreavey
was caught and killed in a deliberate British military ambush. This
archive completely subverts the British narrative of an accidental
patrol that happened upon the scene.”

He noted the use the generic term SF or “Security Forces” points to the
involvement of another unit, possibly the notorious military
assassination unit, the MRF.

He also noted the British soldiers called the area of their ambush and
kill ‘the Reservation’, “as if this was some sick hunt and the people
were animals”.

“We can be sure that the British Army’s area ambush was a deliberate
plan to trap and kill its targets. There was nothing accidental in the
deployment of British troops in the area at that time.”

Padraig O Muirigh of O Muirigh Solicitors said the McAreavey family had
always held the view that their loved one was killed unlawfully by the
British Army.

“In recent years new witness testimony has come to light from two
individuals who spoke to the deceased as he lay injured after an initial
burst of fire. Their evidence supports the proposition that the deceased
had died after sustaining fatal injuries in a second burst of fire as he
lay injured on the ground,” he said.

“This find by Paper Trail is further evidence of a cover-up in relation
to the circumstances of Mr McAreavey’s death. It is clear that there was
no adequate RUC investigation at the time. The Royal Military Police
took the statement from the soldiers, a derogation by the police to the
military of their duty to investigate. It is also highly unusual that
there was no autopsy carried out on the deceased’s body.”

COVER-UP

A fresh inquest is also being sought into the separate killing of an IRA
man in 1973 after documents confirm British soldiers did not follow
their own ‘yellow card’ rules of engagement.

Brian Smyth was killed after members of the Parachute Regiment opened
fire on a group of men in Ardoyne in April 1973. Three other men were
wounded in the incident, one of whom suffered permanent brain damage.

The British army originally claimed the men were armed but this was
disputed by eyewitnesses, including a nun, who maintained the men were
not carrying weapons.

One of the injured men was later convicted of having a gun during the
incident — before being acquitted on a retrial after one of the
soldiers involved revealed he was told to lie and claim that they were
armed.

The newly uncovered document, which dates from 1977, considered the pros
and cons of whether the British government should provide an
out-of-court settlement to the injured men and the mother of the dead
man, Mary Smyth.

Mrs Smyth was herself killed along with her 10-year-old grandson after a
loyalist fire bomb attack at her Oldpark Avenue home in 1978.

The document confirms that no firearms were found on the men and that
there was no forensic evidence to indicate that they were armed.

The British army was also worried following the allegations made by the
soldier who came forward and the subsequent acquittal that “the evidence
given by the soldiers concerned is bound to be suspect” and they they
might face prosecution.

Mr O Muirigh said that the original RUC investigation “failed to
establish the facts of this matter” and that no evidence was taken from
civilian witnesses.

“These grave failings in the RUC investigation and subsequent inquest
could be remedied by a fresh inquest,” he said.

“We would appeal to any of those present with Mr Smyth when he was shot
and any other witnesses to the incident to contact our office”.