Skip to Content | Accessibility Statement | Site Map

Report of the The Bloody Sunday Inquiry
- Volume VI - Chapter 105



The movements of the soldiers after the initial shooting

Chapter 105: The movements of the soldiers after the initial shooting

Contents

Paragraph

Corporal E 105.2

Lance Corporal F 105.4

Private H 105.9

Private G 105.32

Other soldiers 105.43

Civilian evidence 105.47

105.1 We consider first the evidence of the soldiers.

Corporal E

105.2 Corporal E recorded nothing in his Royal Military Police (RMP) statements about what he did after shooting what he described as a petrol and nail bomber. In his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry he recorded that some of the crowd surrounded the body of the man he had shot. He continued:1

“With the other soldiers I then moved forward to make arrests and we arrested about thirty people. My section took them back as far as the wall from which we had come for them to be conveyed back. I was still covering the position at the entrance to Glenfada Park for a few more seconds and then returned to a position in Rossville Street in front of Columbcille Court where armoured vehicles were waiting for members of my platoon.”

1 B95

105.3 In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Corporal E said that after he had shot the man he moved forward slightly with three or four others in order to collect prisoners. He said that they collected roughly 30 prisoners, some or all of whom had been in the crowd which he said had surrounded the person he had shot.1In reply to a question from Lord Widgery, Corporal E agreed that the furthest south he had gone in Glenfada Park North was to about the middle of the eastern block.2

1 WT14.33-34

2 WT14.42

Lance Corporal F

105.4 Lance Corporal F recorded in his first RMP statement1that after he had shot and hit a nail bomber in Glenfada Park North he and other members of his unit advanced towards the rioters:2

“The rioters dispersed.

The remainder of my team gave me cover when I checked around the corner of a building. Around the corner I saw huddled against the wall about 20 people, 19 men and 1 woman. I called to the remainder of the team and we arrested this [sic] twenty people.

We then escorted the prisoners back towards Rossville St…”

1 B121

2 B122

105.5 In the statement taken by Colonel Overbury dated 19th February 1972,1Lance Corporal F recorded that, immediately after he had shot a nail bomber in Glenfada Park North, he ran along the eastern wall of Glenfada Park to the corner. As I did so I heard pistol shots coming from the area of the wall at the far end of the Rossville Flats. He then described shouting that there was a gunman and shooting someone near that wall. We consider this part of Lance Corporal F’s evidence in detail in that part of this report concerned with the events of Sector 5. Lance Corporal F told Colonel Overbury that after these shots he saw people standing near him and huddled together at the end of the flats in Glenfada Park North. He and other soldiers, including Private G, arrested these people.

1 B135

105.6 In his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry,1Lance Corporal F recorded that after he had shot the nail bomber I then asked ‘G’ to cover me as I heard pistol shots in the direction of Rossville Flats. Lance Corporal F stated that he saw a gunman at the far end of the Rossville Flats, shouted a warning to Private G, shot the gunman and then saw and arrested people at the gable end.

1 B138

105.7 In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Lance Corporal F gave a similar account.1He also said that he did not see Corporal E at all when he was in Glenfada Park North,2and that apart from some ambulance people who came forward to the bodies and the people huddled behind the gable end wall he saw no other civilians in Glenfada Park North.3

1 WT14.48

2 WT14.48

3 WT14.73

105.8 Later in this report,1we deal in detail with the evidence relating to the arrest of the people who were at the southern end of the eastern block of Glenfada Park North.

1 Chapter 113

Private H

105.9 In his first RMP statement, Private H gave no clear indication of his movements after he had first fired.1He stated that his patrol came under fire from a concealed sniper firing from a toilet window in “a block of flats extending east towards Chamberlain Street and that he responded by firing 17 shots at the sniper, then changed his magazine and fired two more. The sniper did not return fire”.2In what we believe to have been his second RMP statement he said that the sniper was located on the south side of the car park”.3In his third RMP statement,4Private H recorded that after his initial shooting at a nail bomber and at someone who tried to retrieve a nail bomb in Glenfada Park North he withdrew from his position and took up a position behind a low wall about four feet high next to the north-east corner of the block of garages in Glenfada Park North:5

“Whilst in this position I heard the sound of a single shot being fired. I saw a puff of smoke come from a toilet window in 57 Glenfada Park. I could see the shape of a man, and the muzzle of a rifle pointing out of the window.

I fired the remainder of my magazine in aimed shots at the window to prevent the gunman from further firing because ‘F’ and ‘G’ were both still in the square without cover. I changed my magazine and fired a further two aimed shots at the gunman. I saw him fall and believe I hit him. I then ceased fire just as the order to cease-fire was given to me by Sergeant Major Lewis of my Company.”

1 B220

2 B221

3 B225

4 B228

5 B231

105.10 Private H gave a similar account in his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry, describing the window as a single window with frosted glass and an upper pane which was open.The rifle was sticking out of this pane.1

1 B234

105.11 In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Private H repeated what he said about the 19 shots he had fired at a toilet window and his reason for doing so. He was closely questioned but continued to insist that he had given a true account. He said the window was at ground floor level1and that he had pulled back from where he had been earlier and had fired from the archway leading into Glenfada Park North.2We set out below part of what he told the Widgery Inquiry:3

“Q. You told my Lord of three rounds that you fired in the courtyard.

A. Yes.

Q. So that would mean that you had 17 left after you had fired those?

A. Yes.

Q. And you have told my Lord that you fired 19. Does that mean you had to put on another magazine?

A. Yes, a quick change.

Q. And fired two rounds out of that?

A. Yes.

Q. As a result of those shots did you see any effect?

A. Yes, on the 19th I saw the man fall.

Q. What could you actually see?

A. Normally when I was firing he would move back to the side and on the last one he went down instead of to the side.

Q. Was that from the same position where you had fired the other rounds from?

A. No.

Q. Where was it?

A. I pulled back from this under the archway here.

Q. That is the archway that leads into that courtyard?

A. Yes.

Q. Perhaps I had better get this clear: those shots that you fired in that way, were they fired in quick succession or with intervals between each one?

A. I fired when the gunman appeared.

Q. Were there long intervals between the shots; can you give my Lord any picture?

A. Between three and five seconds.

LORD WIDGERY: I want to get this clear. Do you mean he would go away for a time and then come back and you would fire at him again?

A. Yes. The reason he kept coming back is because two other members of my patrol were in the open and he was trying to shoot them, I am certain.

Q. I follow; I did not quite understand this at first. So it is not 19 shots in one engagement, it is a repetition of this man coming back and your firing at him and his retiring and then returning again?

A. Yes.

Q. How many such incidents are there? We break the 19 shots down into what – 5, 6, 10 different occasions?

A. I do not get what you mean.

Q. He must have come forward on a number of occasions? He came forward on 19 occasions.

Q. Single shot each time?

A. Yes.”

1 WT14.99

2 WT14.100

3 WT14.100

105.12 Private H said that his trajectory photograph (reproduced below) showed where he had fired the 19 shots, marked with a line to the east of where he had indicated his earlier shots.1

1 WT15.16

105.13 In his written evidence to this Inquiry Private H repeated his account of firing 19 shots at a window, though he said he did not now know where it was.1In his oral evidence to us he maintained this account, though he accepted that the window could not have been where he had said it was in 1972.2

1 B264.002

2 Day 377/66-80; Day 378/44-49

105.14 We have no doubt, for the reasons we give below, that the accounts that Private H has given of firing 19 shots through the same window at a sniper were invented by him in an attempt to disguise what in fact had happened. It was suggested to us by Lieutenant 119 (Private H’s Platoon Commander) that what might have happened was that Private H had lost a full ammunition magazine and had invented firing a large number of shots to cover up this loss.1We find this possible explanation quite unconvincing and Private H himself rejected it.2Lieutenant 119 told us that it was relatively easy to obtain a spare empty magazine,3presumably on the basis that this is what Private H might have done, but we have found no evidence that indicates that this was or even might have been the case. We have no doubt that Private H fired the rounds in question on Bloody Sunday, and his own counsel did not suggest otherwise. The question is when and in what circumstances Private H fired these rounds.

1 B1752.018

2 B264

3 B1752.018

105.15 It is to our minds inconceivable that a sniper would come forward to the same window on 19 separate occasions, to be shot at on each occasion until hit with the nineteenth shot. On this basis alone we would reject as false the account given by Private H. Neither his Platoon Commander nor the Company Sergeant Major believed his account.1In addition, there is convincing evidence that no such series of repeated shots as described by Private H hit either 57 Glenfada Park North or indeed anywhere along the southern side of Glenfada Park North.

1 B1752.018; Day 373/94

105.16 James and Margaret McCartney, who lived in 57 Glenfada Park, stated that no bullets went through a frosted window in the property, but one round did break the clear glass of the bedroom window before lodging itself in the wardrobe.1William Kelly, who was in the next-door house (number 59) gave a Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association statement which indicates that this shot occurred when he attempted to go to the casualties he could see lying in the courtyard.2

1 AM88.1-2; AM90.1-6; AM90.6

2 AK29.1

105.17 Peter Carr, the Treasurer of the Abbey Street and Area Tenants Association, made a statement dated 10th March 1972,1 in which he recorded that he had conducted a personal inspection of the area on 9th March, during which he discovered the following damage apparently caused by bullets:

a) There was one bullet hole in the vicinity of No 55 Glenfada Park. The phraseology of the statement is obscure as to where exactly the bullet mark was but it appears to have been on the garden wall that ran out from the property on the left as one faced the house.2

b) There were no bullet marks on the masonry of 57 Glenfada Park. The window marked by Private H on a photograph shown to Peter Carr was a kitchen window of clear glass, where the putty was obviously old and the window unmarked. To the right was a bathroom window of unmarked frosted glass, also with old putty. Next to the right was a bedroom window that had just been replaced and he was shown a bullet hole through the door of the wardrobe.3

c) There was one bullet mark under the bedroom window of 59 Glenfada Park and the down pipe between the bathroom and the kitchen had been broken, apparently by a bullet. There was also a bullet mark on the garden wall.4

1 AC43.1.001; AC43.2-4

2 AC43.2

3 AC43.2-3

4 AC43.3

105.18 This sequence of windows (clear kitchen, frosted bathroom, clear bedroom) can be seen in the first of the following photographs, the middle frosted glass window in the second, the replaced bedroom window in the third, the damaged bedroom window in the fourth, and the damage to the wardrobe in the bedroom in the fifth.

105.19 William McCartney, the son of James and Margaret McCartney, told us in his written statement to this Inquiry that his father told him that in addition to the round that came through the bedroom window, one bullet had hit the wall outside and another had struck the kitchen or bathroom outlet pipe.1 It seems to us more likely than not that these were the shots recorded by Peter Carr as hitting 59 Glenfada Park, since his obviously careful observations were made soon after the event and he did not record similar shots hitting 57 Glenfada Park.

1 AM86.3

105.20 The numbering of the three houses on the south side of Glenfada Park North ran in odd numbers, starting with number 55 on the eastern side, ie the side closest to Rossville Street.

105.21 William McKinney and Joe Mahon fell more or less in front of 59 Glenfada Park, so if two bullets hit William McKinney it is possible that one ended up causing one of the marks noted by Peter Carr at that address. It is possible that some of the bullet marks in this area observed by Peter Carr resulted from shots fired by Private H after the initial burst of firing.

105.22 Corporal E’s trajectory photograph (reproduced below) shows the two shots that he said he had fired in Glenfada Park as travelling in a direction that might have hit 55 Glenfada Park; though in our view, on the basis of this trajectory photograph, they appear more likely to have gone into the entrance to Glenfada Park South.

105.23 For reasons given elsewhere in this report,1 we have concluded that Corporal E is the soldier most likely to have shot Patrick O’Donnell, since the line of his two shots according to his trajectory photograph came closest to where Patrick O’Donnell was sheltering at the southern end of the eastern block of Glenfada Park North. However, as we have noted earlier,2 it is not clear whether one or two shots landed where Patrick O’Donnell was wounded. If it was two shots, both would also have hit the fence and wall where he was, and accordingly are unlikely to have caused the bullet hole at number 55 recorded by Peter Carr. If only one shot landed near Patrick O’Donnell, it is possible that one of Corporal E’s shots did hit 55 Glenfada Park.

1 Paragraph 112.26 2Paragraphs 104.505 and 104.518

105.24 The only soldier who said at any stage that he had fired at 57 Glenfada Park was Private H. Although we reject his description of what he was firing at and the number of shots that he said he had fired at that time, he said that he had shot at a window in this house after the initial firing. This is consistent with the evidence of William Kelly to which we have referred above.

105.25 Item 11 in the Loden List of Engagements1records 1 sniper in toilet window at GR 43191683 fired upon. Not hit. The grid reference corresponds to 57 Glenfada Park. To our minds the likely source for this entry is Private H, though the entry, in common with the other entries, does not record the number of shots the soldier told Major Loden that he had fired, nor that, as Private H afterwards asserted, he had hit his target with his 19th shot.

1 B2214

105.26 In our view it is probable that Private H fired a shot at a window of 57 Glenfada Park.

105.27 No other soldier has said that he saw Private H firing any shots after the initial burst of firing. Private G told the Widgery Inquiry that there was shooting going on, apparently as he was making his way towards the bodies, which could have been further shooting by Private H, but in view of the unsatisfactory nature of Private G’s accounts, little reliance can be placed on this.1

1 WT14.93

105.28 In these circumstances we can find no good reason for the single shot that Private H probably fired at 57 Glenfada Park after the initial burst of firing. At the stage he fired this shot, the other soldiers would have been moving in Glenfada Park North and there is no evidence whatever to suggest that there was then any paramilitary activity in the area that could have justified this shot. Warrant Officer Class II Lewis (the Company Sergeant Major) told us that it was his belief that some soldiers, including Private H, might have responded enthusiastically, over-enthusiastically, to a situation that could have been controlled easier by firing fewer rounds.1Applied to the shot that in our view Private H fired at 57 Glenfada Park, this is a euphemistic way of describing a shot fired at a house, obviously giving rise to a serious risk of harm to the occupants, for which Private H neither had, nor could have believed that he had, any justification whatever.

1 Day 373/99

105.29 It was submitted on Private H’s behalf that it was a possibility1 that his firing of 19 shots, or some of them, was the incident in the Eden Place waste ground witnessed by Corporal INQ 444,2 to which we refer elsewhere in this report.3 In our view this is likely (though far from certain) to be the case in relation to some of Private H’s shots, though there is nothing in Corporal INQ 444’s account to suggest that Private H was firing at a window or other specific target, as opposed to shooting wildly upwards. However, we also consider that Private H was probably responsible for firing a substantial number of indiscriminate shots from the Rossville Street entrance to Glenfada Park North, at a stage soon after soldiers had arrested people sheltering at the southern end of the block at the entrance. We give our reasons for this conclusion when we consider the events of Sector 5.

1 In the written submissions it was stated that this was “more likely than not” (FS9.114).

2 Day 430/85-87

3 Chapter 61

105.30 In summary, therefore, we are of the view that Private H fired at least one further shot in Glenfada Park North after the initial burst of firing; and that he probably also fired indiscriminately from the entrance to Glenfada Park North and, after that, indiscriminately from somewhere in or about the Eden Place waste ground.

105.31 Private H told us that he was terrified on the day.1This may have been so, but in our view this does not excuse his indiscriminate firing. We consider elsewhere in this report2the shots that he said he fired upon first going into Glenfada Park North.

1 B264 2Paragraphs 97.27–48

Private G

105.32 In his first RMP statement1Private G recorded that after he had fired three aimed shots at a man with a rifle in Glenfada Park North and seen him and another gunman fall, the group of people standing near to the gunmen picked up the two weapons and ran off down an alleyway in a North Easterly direction.2In context it is clear that North Easterly should have read “south-westerly”. Private G continued:3

“We split up and gave chase. I ran down the alleyway past the two bodies lying on the ground but the people with the weapons had already turned off from the alleyway out of sight. We were recalled to Rossville St and when I returned I found that prisoners had been taken from the area by other members of my platoon. The bodies of the gunmen were left where they fell.”

1 B168-170

2 B169

3 B169

105.33 In his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry, Private G recorded that:1

“There were a fair number of people on the opposite side of the courtyard. When the men fell a small crowd gathered round quickly. I could not actually see anyone pick up a weapon because there were too many people in front. I did not fire at them. The crowd ran off quickly up a little alleyway only a couple of yards behind them. F moved down the wall of the eastern building to the big opening by the barricade and I worked round the other two walls. We could not run straight across the courtyard because it is open on a number of sides and we could have been fired on. By the time I reached the far corner the crowd had completely vanished. There was nobody there at all, just the two bodies and another body a few yards further down towards the opening.

Our Platoon Commander then recalled us. I heard F shout ‘There’s a gunman’ or something like that. I saw him down on one knee at the south east corner of Glenfada Park aiming in an easterly direction. I saw him fire one or two shots in a direction out of my sight.

At this point a party of about 20 people where F was were ferried back by F and some others.”

1 B187

105.34 Private G had not mentioned in his RMP statements hearing Lance Corporal F shout a warning and then aim and fire in an easterly direction.

105.35 In his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Private G said that there was a fair crowd along the footpath where he had seen gunmen, that they immediately ran past the two who had been shot and when they had run past the weapons had gone as well ”.1He then described how he and Lance Corporal F gave each other cover while (as seems tolerably clear from the transcript) he went west and then south while Lance Corporal F went south.

1 WT14.80

105.36 Private G then said My idea of moving up there was to find where the weapons had gone”, but just as we got there we got the recall ”.1According to the transcript there followed the following exchange:

“Q. Before you got the recall did you fire through that alleyway in the direction of Abbey Park, towards you on the model?

A. Yes, Sir.

Q. Did you see any bodies through there in the open space just beyond the gap?

A. Do you mean through here?

Q. Yes.

A. No, sir.

Q. You did not see any bodies through there?

A. No.

Q. Then you say you got a recall?

A. Yes.”

1 WT14.81

105.37 The questioning then turned to the topic of hearing Lance Corporal F shout a warning and shoot in an easterly direction across the front of the Rossville Flats, in respect of which Private G gave the same account as he had given in his written statement for the Widgery Inquiry.1He said that he had not mentioned this shooting by Lance Corporal F in his RMP statements because he was only making a statement about what he had done.2 This explanation is quite unconvincing and we do not accept it, since he had in fact described in his first RMP statement3the earlier shooting by Lance Corporal F. In our view Private G invented this part of his account in order to provide support for the account eventually given by Lance Corporal F of shooting in an easterly direction.

1 WT14.81

2 WT14.83

3 B169

105.38 Later in his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Private G said that the crowd at the gable end had not been removed before Lance Corporal F shot across the front of the Rossville Flats. He said that he did not see anyone shoot a man who was lying on the ground, and that when he and Lance Corporal F had fired initially there was no-one else in front of their targets or immediately behind them.1

1 WT14.87

105.39 It is important to note that during his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, Private G was not questioned by anyone about what the transcript records as his admission that he had fired through the south-west alleyway towards Abbey Park. There is a passage near the end of his oral evidence that seems to us in its context to amount to a denial that he or any other soldier had fired through that alleyway:1

“Q. ‘I ran down the alleyway past the two bodies lying on the ground, but the people with the weapons had already turned off from the alleyway out of sight.’ Do you remember saying that?

A. Yes.

Q. To what alleyway did you intend to refer?

A. What I mean is that I came through here, through there and looked down here.

Q. And looked across here?

A. Yes.

Q. You did go down that alleyway?

A. I did not go down here or in here. I just went into that alleyway, sir.

Q. Coming just to the people who had fled down there?

A. I mean trying to ascertain what is happening. I could not actually chase across there. We had to do that in a soldierly way, working our way round.

Q. You went up that alleyway looking for the people who had gone away with what you believed were the weapons from the two men who you thought had been shot?

A. I did not follow them any further than that, sir, because we got a recall.

Q. Who recalled you?

A. Our Platoon Commander. He came over.

Q. He came over and recalled you?

A. Yes. I do not know whether it was him who actually said to me, but I got the words ‘Come back’.

Q. Do you have a rifle which you keep all the time?

A. Yes.

Q. Is the number of that rifle A.5259?

A. I could not be sure about that, sir. We go by butt numbers. Mine is 11 or something.

Mr. READ: I would be grateful for assistance from my friend –

Mr. GIBBENS: I was instructed that that is his rifle.

Mr. READ: Did you see anybody lying down in that alleyway?

A. Not actually in the alley, no, sir.

Q. Did you see anyone in at the barricade behind – a lot of people there?

A. No, sir, I did not go out into here.

Q. You did not fire down there?

A. No, sir.

Q. Did you see any other soldier fire down there?

A. No, sir.”

1 WT14.94-95

105.40 Despite the reference in the third to last question to the barricade”, we are sure that the last two questions related to the alleyway leading into Abbey Park, not to the entrance into Glenfada Park North from Rossville Street, because Private G had already given evidence of seeing Lance Corporal F firing in an easterly direction from the latter entrance. Had Private G actually made an admission that he had fired through the south-west alleyway in the direction of Abbey Park, it would undoubtedly have been picked up in subsequent questioning, if only because he had not previously said anything about firing into Abbey Park. It may be that all concerned realised that the answer was not responsive to the apparent question, but in our view it is much more likely that a mistake was made in the transcript. If the word fire was a mistake for look the passage under discussion would make sense and be consistent with what Private G had said in his previous statements, as well as his later denial that he had fired through that alleyway. In our view, in his oral evidence to the Widgery Inquiry, so far from admitting that he had fired into Abbey Park, Private G denied that he had done so.

105.41 There is no reason to doubt that after the initial burst of firing Private G made his way to the south-west corner of Glenfada Park North, and it may be he did so, as he himself described, by moving westwards then southwards along the western side. His evidence was consistently to the effect that he did no more than look through that alleyway in an attempt to see where the weapons he had earlier described had gone, after which he withdrew when he heard that the soldiers had been ordered to pull out.

105.42 For the reasons we give hereafter1we have no doubt that what in fact Private G did was not only to go to and through that alleyway, but also to fire from there into Abbey Park. We likewise have no doubt that it was in Abbey Park that Gerard McKinney and Gerald Donaghey were shot and mortally wounded by Private G.2We should note here that we are satisfied that Jim Wray was shot on the ground before Private G went into Abbey Park. We have already considered3John Porter’s evidence, which was to the effect that this occurred afterwards. However, in this regard we have concluded that he was mistaken in recalling this sequence of events. As will be seen from our discussion of what happened in Abbey Park,4Private G went through the alleyway, fired one (or possibly two) shots, mortally injuring Gerard McKinney and Gerald Donaghey, and then fired a further shot in the direction of the people coming to the aid of these casualties, before returning to Glenfada Park North. Apart from John Porter, we have found no other evidence to suggest that it was after Private G returned from Abbey Park that Jim Wray was shot on the ground. The evidence that we have considered elsewhere5indicates to us that while Jim Wray lay on the ground for long enough to exchange some words with those close by before he was shot again, this period was not long enough to allow Private G to go towards Abbey Park, shoot there as we describe below and return to Glenfada Park North. Furthermore, the evidence of both William O’Reilly and Gerald Campbell6,7 is to the effect that Jim Wray was shot on the ground before a soldier came into Abbey Park.

1 Chapter 112

2 The Widgery Inquiry seemed to proceed on the basis that these two had been shot in the south-west corner of Glenfada Park North; and Lord Widgery so found in his report.

3 Paragraphs 104.293–302

4 Chapters 107 and 112

5 Paragraphs 104.368 and 104.385

6 Paragraphs 104.309–316

7 AC13.9

Other soldiers

105.43 As to other soldiers, we have noted earlier in this report1that Lieutenant 119 said that he followed Corporal E and Lance Corporal F into Glenfada Park North; saw Lance Corporal F fire two rounds and saw Private G about halfway down the western side; and then, seeing three bodies at the south-western corner, started off towards them, at which point he received an order to withdraw.2For reasons we have already given,3we consider that Lieutenant 119 was mistaken in identifying Lance Corporal F as the soldier he saw firing two rounds; in our view the soldier in question was probably Corporal E.

1 Paragraphs 96.4–5

2 WT14.14

3 Paragraph 100.19

105.44 It is not possible to be sure of the movements of Lance Corporal J. It appears that he did, as he said, go into Glenfada Park North; Lieutenant 119 said he recalled seeing him there.1As already noted, Lance Corporal J said that he saw Soldiers F and G firing at nail bombers, but for reasons already given2we can place no reliance on his evidence.

1 WT14.9 2Paragraphs 81.50–57, 82.84, 89.33–41, 98.11–15, 100.4, 100.18 and 100.21

105.45 As we have said,1we consider that Private 027 followed Lieutenant 119 into Glenfada Park North.

1 Paragraphs 96.9–12

105.46 It is likely that many other members of Anti-Tank Platoon who had been at the Kells Walk wall moved into or closer to Glenfada Park North, as they seem to have been involved in the arrest or escorting of civilians who had been sheltering at the south gable wall of the eastern block of Glenfada Park North. None of them has said that he saw any of the shooting in Glenfada Park North, nor does their evidence provide any assistance on the situation there during or after the initial burst of firing, though we return to their accounts1when considering the circumstances in which the arrests were made.

1 Chapter 113

Civilian evidence

105.47 There is not much civilian evidence of what the soldiers did and where they went in Glenfada Park North after the initial burst of firing, doubtless because the civilians had fled or were trying to keep out of sight. We consider what evidence there is in the context of discussing the shooting in Abbey Park,1the circumstances in which civilians were arrested in the vicinity of the wall at the southern end of the eastern block of Glenfada Park North,2and what happened in Sector 5.3

1 Chapter 107

2 Chapter 113

3 Chapter 119

105.48 We now turn to what happened in Abbey Park, and first describe the layout of that part of the city.