INQUEST INTO THE DEATH OF HUGH GERARD CONEY RECOMMENCES HALF A CENTURY AFTER HE WAS SHOT IN THE BACK BY A BRITISH SOLDIER
Fifty years. Half a century has elapsed since Hugh Gerard Coney, known as Gerard to his family and friends, was shot dead by a British soldier as he was attempting to escape from Long Kesh internment camp along with several other detainees in November 1974. He had been interned without trial nor charge the previous year. Although the circumstances surrounding the shooting have always been disputed, Gerard’s surviving relatives have had to wait all this time, a lifetime, for a legally compliant investigation into the death of their loved one.
The original inquest in 1975 relied upon the inadequate RUC investigation and the differing accounts of British soldiers, and it delivered an open verdict. More recently, a report by the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) revealed that an RUC officer had recommended that the soldier who fired the fatal shot should be charged with murder, which was opposed by his superiors and never happened. Former Attorney General John Larkin ordered a new inquest into Gerard’s death in 2016, which opened last year but was shortly adjourned.
The inquest recommenced this week in Newry Courthouse before Coroner Anne-Louise Toal and a jury sworn on Tuesday, the 13th of February. Counsel for the coroner presented the jurors with a comprehensive summary of the key aspects surrounding legacy inquests in general and this case in particular, which will be presented in written and oral evidence throughout the five weeks the court is expected to sit. The jury will hear all the available evidence to draw their conclusions as to how Gerard met his death, and one of the many questions they are expected to answer is whether there was a necessity to fire a fatal shot – or a shot at all – considering the circumstances.
The first witness to be called to the witness box was civil engineer Mr Magill, who had compiled a topography report for this inquest. His evidence focused on maps and plans of locations in and around Long Kesh to help the jury understand how and where the events of the fatal escape happened. Civilian witnesses – former detainees – were expected to start giving evidence on the second day of the inquest, but the schedule was halted by an apparent issue raised by counsel for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) – they are of the view that the jury should be presented with a broad scope of information relating to the IRA, Gerard’s character reframed in those terms, and civilian witnesses questioned along those lines. This led to a day-long legal discussion between barristers on relevance, permissibility and credibility without the presence of the jury – jurors should only focus on and assess the evidence, rather than legal matters. Coroner Toal ruled that the MoD’s submission for a broader scope to be included in the evidence exceeded what was relevant in this case – how Gerard came to meet his death on the 6th of November 1974. She also ruled on lines of questioning that should and should not be accepted during the evidence of civilian witnesses, thus providing all acting parties with a clear margin to proceed. The first civilian witnesses were then called to the witness box on day three of the inquest, one by one. They are all former detainees who took part in the failed escape along with Gerard in 1974.
The first civilian witness to be called was Mr Anthony ‘Tony’ Hughes. He had been interned in July 1973 when he was only 17 years old, and released in 1975. He was convicted for the escape, but the conviction was quashed in 2020 because he had been interned unlawfully – the Secretary of State hadn’t signed his internment order. Mr Hughes told the court that he met Gerard shortly before the escape in Cage 5 – he knew who he was, but they were not close. He explained that the detainees built a tunnel for the escape and how they attempted to carry out the escape until a British Army jeep arrived and they were halted. He did not see Gerard on the ground, but he heard two shots. The witness was sure – no warnings were given prior to the shots being fired.
Mr Hughes then recounted what proceeded. The captured escapees were made to lay on the ground, facing down, spread-eagled while British soldiers beat them and shouted abuse at them. He also said that British soldiers brought dogs during this time and kept them on long leads, allowing them to nip at and bite the escapees. The witness said that the captured escapees were then brought to a wire fence and made to stand there facing it with arms and legs spread, surrounded by British soldiers and the dogs. If they moved at all, they would be beaten by the soldiers. Mr Hughes remembered that a priest known to the internees appeared on the scene after a while, and he walked with them as they were made to march back into the camp through the front gates. The witness believes that it was during this time that the brutality of soldiers stopped, but it was not the end of the ordeal for the internees. When they arrived inside the camp, prison officers were waiting for them in two rows, carrying batons, and the internees were made to run between them while the officers beat them – the term used was ‘running the gauntlet’. “I had blood all over me”, the witness recalled, and he and some others had to be brought to hospital.
The account of the second civilian witness, Mr Michael Mullan, was similar to Mr Hughe’s. He was only 18 when he was interned without trial and did not know when he was going to be released, living in conditions that he felt degraded by. When the opportunity arose, he tried to escape. He did not see Gerard when he was shot, but he did hear the shots and he heard no warnings given before that. He described that he was also beaten by the British Army and the prison wardens afterwards.
The barrister for the MoD focused his line of questioning on trying to discredit the witness on irrelevant aspects for determining how Gerard died, which gave rise to a legal argument between counsel. The MoD seemed uncomfortable and worried that the jury might think that these men were “innocent” people under terrible legal and human conditions held in Long Kesh. Still, the Coroner was clear – the rights or wrongs of Internment and the overall unfolding and situation of the conflict fall outside what is relevant in this inquest. The Coroner showed serious concern in this regard, particularly regarding certain lines of questioning, which she felt were drifting away from the circumstances of Gerard’s death and, therefore, exceeding the critical aspects of the case.
The third civilian witness to be called to give evidence was Mr Sean Dorris, another former internee who participated and was captured in the failed escape in 1974. He was interviewed by the RUC in 1974, but they only ever asked him questions about the escape, never about Gerard. “It was as if the death meant nothing to them”, he stated. As with the previous witnesses, he was not called to give evidence in the original inquest, neither was he contacted by the HET when they looked into the case. He did not know Gerard. He saw a soldier holding a rifle as he was trying to escape, and although he did not see the shots being fired, he did hear them.
Mr Dorris was confident that the British soldiers did not shout any warnings – there was no indication that they would open fire. He would have heard a warning if one had been given.
The witness saw Gerard’s body twice, in different locations. He was not sure whether Gerard had been shot where he first saw his body, but he was able to explain that British soldiers moved the body to the second location shortly after the escapees were captured, thus altering the scene. While he was at the hands of the British Army in their jeep, where he was being held, the witness recalled being kicked and hit, as well as verbally abused, including mockery about Gerard having been shot dead. He was later brought inside the camp, where prison officers beat him up with batons, and on his way to the cells, the witness was made to run the gauntlet. He had to be brought to Musgrave Park Hospital after the incident for medical treatment, and to the prison hospital after that.
All the witnesses who attended Newry Courthouse also stated that, to their knowledge, the escapees were not carrying anything metallic or shiny that could have led British soldiers to believe someone might have been carrying a gun.
The inquest continues on Monday, the 19th of February, in Newry Courthouse.
