CLONOE INQUEST NOTES
Summary of 2023 November-December hearings + case management updates
The inquest into the killings of Kevin Barry O’Donnell, Peter Clancy, Patrick Vincent and Sean O’Farrell in the ambush at Clonoe Chapel on the outskirts of Coalisland, County Tyrone, resumed at the end of November 2023 at Laganside Courts in Belfast before Mr Justice Humphreys.
The four young men were killed in a hail of gunfire from a covert unit of the Special Air Service (SAS) of the British Army on the evening of February 16, 1992, on their return from having launched a gun attack on the fortified barracks of the RUC and British Army in Coalisland on behalf of the IRA. According to historical records, a total of 514 spent cartridges were recovered at the scene in Clonoe, all of which belonged to the British soldiers’ weapons. As we approach the 32nd anniversary of the fatal ambush, and with the guillotine date of the Legacy Act around the corner, the inquest is the first ever investigation into the deaths of the four young men which is compliant with international legal standards such as those laid by the European Court of Human Rights regarding Article 2 ECHR, the right to life.
The coroner heard evidence from over 30 witnesses during the six days the court sat on the fourth floor at Laganside Court between November and December 2023 – a mix of written, oral, photographic, and video evidence from a topography expert, civilian witnesses, and former RUC and military personnel.
Some civilian witnesses noted inaccuracies between the account they gave to the RUC in 1992 and the notes police officers recorded on their files. One particular witness, known to this inquest as CC28, explained that she spoke to two police officers on two different occasions in 1992, and neither of them seemed to have any interest in taking her statement or investigating the matter. On the night of the killings, CC28 was driving in the area when two men with rifles stopped her car at a junction near the Clonoe Chapel, from where she heard the shooting believed to be that of the ambush. At the time, she thought they were IRA men because of their outfits – they appeared to be wearing camouflage and civilian clothing but not a uniform. However, it was evident from her testimony that the men were part of the covert operation mounted by the British Army and RUC. This witness further revealed that she heard one single shot being fired minutes after the initial intense, heavy gunfire which left her terrified.
Most evidence from former RUC and military personnel revolved around general organisational and operational matters involving the Headquarters Mobile Support Unit (HMSU) and the Tasking and Co-Ordination Group South (TCGS) in the RUC, along with their connection to the Regional Head of Special Branch (RHSB) and the Regional Assistant Chief Constable (RACC), as well as the Special Military Units (SMUs) and Close Observation Platoons (COPs), among others. It is peculiar, however, that none of the police and military witnesses in this tranche of the inquest could recall the key and specific aspects that would either prove or disprove what we believe was a shoot-to-kill operation on February 16, 1992, despite their participation in it. Peculiar, but unfortunately not surprising for anyone familiar with legacy proceedings touching upon deaths caused by so-called “security services” during our conflict.
Among the RUC witnesses, two former sergeants attached to HMSU gave evidence in court, namely, CP2 and CP8. The former had been deployed in the area as responsible for the only two HMSU crews (consisting of 6 men) supporting SMU that night, although, according to the witness, the RUC would usually have deployed 6-7 crews. He could not explain the reason for the shortage nor recall any briefings or the debrief. His only recollection seemed to be that he sealed off and preserved the scene after the gunfire, called an ambulance and accompanied a priest who gave the last rites to the deceased. He also took the film reel from a neighbour’s camera who took photographs from his home near the chapel, but other than that, he was unable to say who he talked to at the scene or what was discussed.
The witness known to this inquest as CP8 was the sergeant tasked with directing the HMSU from the Operations Room on the night of the shooting. He had been involved in planning the HMSU operation in support of SMU on the days leading to it – he attended several meetings and briefings, which included one with the Chief Constable at RUC HQ on the morning of the ambush. Nevertheless, the witness did not seem to be fully aware of the approved plan when a barrister for the next of kin asked him about it. According to CP8, no plan was authorised at the meeting with the Chief Constable. Still, he was briefed later that day by TCG that they would be supporting SMU in an arrest operation, “securing the scene” and “preserving evidence”, among other tasks. CP8’s testimony was that the intelligence they were given suggested that a “heavily armed” IRA unit forming from Clonoe Chapel was to attack Coalisland RUC barracks and that the authorities were to prevent the attack by arresting the IRA men at Clonoe. The limited numbers of HMSU deployed did not seem to match the description and expectations the RUC allegedly had about the plan though, as was suggested by a barrister for the family of Kevin Barry O’Donnell – did they expect to arrest a team of heavily armed IRA men with the support of only 6 RUC officers who were part of the two HMSU crews? Or was there another reason for only having deployed two crews, such as the lack of necessity due to the authorities knowing there would be no arrests? The witness was adamant that the plan was an arrest operation but could not explain further, not even why a Special Branch report, part of the evidence in this inquest, would use the word “ambush” to refer to the plan.
Another former RUC witness, a Detective Inspector in the TCGS and known to the court as P19, failed to answer critical questions from counsel for the families about the operational plan and the reasons for the authorities to kill four men when it is clear they did not pose any risk at the time. When asked about the general attitude of “security forces” towards known members of the IRA, P19 responded that if these people were armed and killed in active service, the responsibility lay with them, not the “security forces”. P19 also stated that the TCGS existed to exploit intelligence and added that they “could not just keep picking up bodies and putting them into body bags”. This witness has also appeared before Mr Justice Humphreys in the Coagh inquest due to his involvement in what was another shoot-to-kill operation in Tyrone. His attitude towards the cross-examination by counsel for the next of kin appeared to be defensive and quite evasive. As was pointed out by a barrister acting on behalf of one of the families, P19 seemed to remember the process that would or should have occurred, the theory, rather than the specifics of what actually happened.
The evidence from former military witnesses followed similar lines – none of them could remember key aspects or many details about briefings other than that they would be supporting an arrest operation in response to the intelligence mentioned above. One of those who gave evidence was a man known to this inquest as Soldier P, who was granted special screening measures – his voice was distorted and only the coroner was allowed to see him while giving evidence. Soldier P gave two statements with contradictory elements but was evasive when questioned about those by a barrister for the next of kin.
As part of the evidence before the coroner, a video recorded by the “security forces” at the scene at Clonoe Chapel was shown in court, including graphic images of the bodies. Although the relatives of those killed were alerted of the sensitive and distressing nature of the footage before the video was played, they chose to stay in the public gallery, emotionally stirred but determined, and dignified. They have waited over three decades for an effective investigation into the killings of their loved ones. They have waited 32 years for the rights they are entitled to as bereaved families.
The inquest was adjourned to continue in the new year.
A preliminary hearing was held on Thursday last in the High Court in Belfast to discuss outstanding issues in advance of the resumption of the inquest, now expected to be in March 2024. The Presiding Coroner set a clear calendar to guarantee all the relevant evidence is heard before the May cutoff date: the ballistic report must be ready by the end of January; statements from identified individuals who were allegedly involved in the IRA operation should also be taken by the end of the month, or else statutory notices served if necessary; former military witnesses’ statements, including those who discharged their weapons and planned the operation, must be available to the Coroner by the end of February; and a draft statement from former RUC chief constable Sir Hugh Annesley is also expected to be with the Coroner’s service in the next week or two. The court should then sit for three weeks starting on Monday the 4th of March 2024.
Mr Justice Humphreys was clear: “The inquest cannot wait any longer.” As we approach the 32nd anniversary of the massacre, we echo those words and add that families, as well as the wider community, cannot wait any longer either.
