Inquest delay fears as PSNI diverts staff to Omagh bomb inquiry
David Young, Irish News, March 19th, 2025
AN INQUEST for a former IRA commander could be hit by a delay because of police diverting resources to support the Omagh bomb inquiry, a court heard yesterday.
A preliminary hearing in the case of Jock Davison was told that it was not yet possible to set a date for the substantive inquest as a result of outstanding matters related to the disclosure of police files to the coroner.
Mr Davison (47), was shot dead in the Markets area of Belfast as he walked to work in May 2015.
He had been involved in a personal dispute with other republicans.
Three months after Mr Davison was killed, former IRA man Kevin McGuigan was murdered in a shooting in nearby Short Strand.
Coroner Patrick McGurgan held a preliminary hearing yesterday to seek an update on the disclosure process.
The PSNI is seeking to withhold certain sensitive files from the inquest on the grounds of public interest immunity (PII).
“ One issue which arises at the moment, your honour, is that, in relation to the PSNI’s concentration of its resources in respect of the Omagh bomb inquiry
Barrister John Rafferty, representing the PSNI, said some of the material that will be subject to a PII application had been prepared and was ready for him and fellow barrister Peter Coll KC to review before providing a formal opinion on the proposed redactions.
However, Mr Rafferty said it was unclear when the remainder of the material would be ready for counsel to review.
He explained that police were having to divert resources to the Omagh Bombing Inquiry, which began substantive hearings in January.
Inquiry due to resume in summer
The inquiry is currently adjourned but is due to resume in the summer when significant police evidence related to the 1998 dissident republican bombing is likely to feature.
Addressing the coroner, Mr Rafferty said: “One issue which arises at the moment, your honour, is that, in relation to the PSNI’s concentration of its resources in respect of the Omagh bomb inquiry, as to whether or not it will be feasible in the very short term for Mr Coll and I to attend PSNI and complete our opinion,” he said.
“So we are seeking instructions on that, given that at least some of the material is ready for the opinion to commence, and I’m afraid I can’t say anything further at the moment in respect of our ability to do that, but we have sought instructions.”
The barrister added: “I hope your honour will understand that this is something which seems to be moving relatively quickly, and is a recent development and is being reacted to almost on a case by case basis to see what the updated instructions are.
“But it is something we’re obviously focusing on in this case and instructions have been sought.”
Mr Rafferty said he would update the court within 14 days on how the issue was set to impact on the PII process timeline.
Counsel to the coroner Siobhan McCrory told Mr McGurgan that it was not possible to set a date for the inquest while the issues over disclosure remained outstanding.
“At this stage we’re not in a position to set a date for the substantive hearing,” she said.
The coroner listed the case for another preliminary hearing on May 8 when he will receive a further update on the disclosure process.
RUC probe over killing of IRA man 'inadequate'
Andrew Madden, Belfast Telegraph, March 19th, 2025
An RUC investigation into the killing of an IRA man “lacked independence and rigour” and was “wholly inadequate”, the Police Ombudsman has found.
Colum Marks (29) was shot by police on April 10, 1991 in Downpatrick. He later died from his injuries in hospital.
The shooting happened during a police operation aimed at thwarting an IRA mortar attack on security forces and arresting suspects.
Marks' family disputed the RUC's version of the events and made a complaint to the Ombudsman, who began an investigation in 2017.
While some evidence was available, the majority of records from RUC's South Region Tactical Co-ordinating Group (TCG) relating to the investigation into Marks' shooting were later destroyed.
Ombudsman Marie Anderson reviewed documentation of interviews of officers involved in the August 1991 operation, including an interview with the officer who fired the fatal shots, referred to as Officer B.
Ms Anderson noted that Officer B was only asked five questions, two of which related to distance and lighting between two points on a map.
“Given the seriousness of the incident, in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights Article 2 and the 'right to life', I am of the view that the original RUC CID investigation was wholly inadequate in a number of important respects,” Ms Anderson said.
“Officer B's interview failed to adequately examine his actions or mindset at the time of the incident, and lacked the necessary depth and rigour expected in light of the fact that this was a fatal police shooting.
“Equally, the statements provided by other officers omitted critical detail about the planning, tasking, coordination and communications on the night. Significantly, they do not mention any briefings or information received prior to their deployment on this operation, including the suspects believed to be involved.”
Carrying mortar
The Ombudsman reviewed radio transmission logs of the police operation, which detailed how Marks was seen carrying what appeared to be a mortar at 9.29pm on April 10, 1991.
A few minutes later Marks was seen in the driveway of a house in St Patrick's Avenue and the mortar was confirmed as having been assembled in the driveway at 9.46pm.
At 9.47pm officers were instructed to arrest the man, who then fled the scene across a recreation ground, where he was shot.
Officer B said he believed Marks was armed and claimed he refused to stop when an attempt was made to arrest him. No gun was found at the scene.
“There are no existing TCG records and there are no witness statements or depositions from TCG officers explaining their role and participation in the planning and decision-making,” Ms Anderson said.
“I am unable to conclude, therefore, whether there was an opportunity to disrupt the planned mortar attack, to arrest Mr Marks before that evening or to arrest him prior to the first recorded sighting of him by Police Officer B at 9.29pm.
“However, from the evidence which is available, there was a short window of opportunity to arrest Mr Marks on that evening between 9.29pm, when he was first observed carrying the mortar, and 9.47pm when the instruction was given to arrest him.
“It is clear that police intended to arrest suspects in circumstances that connected them to the weapon, and the intent to commit an unlawful act, rather than possession of the weapon alone. In the presence of what was described as a viable explosive device, it is my view that this was a high-risk strategy on the part of police whose primary duty was to protect life.”
Inadequate rigour
She added: “I am critical of aspects of the initial RUC CID investigation, particularly the initial under caution interview of Police Officer B on 11 April, 1991.
“I am also concerned that this matter was not referred to the ICPC by the Chief Constable given its gravity.
“In consequence I conclude that the initial police investigation lacked sufficient independence and was not afforded the scrutiny and rigour that a fatal shooting of this nature warranted.”
In 2023 the Public Prosecution Service decided not to prosecute Officer B over the shooting.
Gavin Booth, of Phoenix Law, who represents the Marks family, said: “It's clear from the findings that there was time to arrest Colum prior to the shooting and this was not acted upon by the RUC at the time. The Ombudsman was clear that Colum was unarmed, unmasked and not posing a threat when he was shot several times.”
SAS and MI5 involved in IRA man’s fatal shooting
Connla Young, Crime and Security Correspondent, Irish News, March 19th, 2025
THE SAS and MI5 were involved in an operation which resulted in an IRA man being shot dead by the RUC, a Police Ombudsman report has revealed.
Details of their previously unknown involvement in the killing of Colum Marks are contained in a Police Ombudsman report published yesterday.
Marks was shot dead during an “intelligence-led” operation as the Provisionals attempted to set up a mortar attack near Downpatrick RUC station on April 10 1991. It is believed passing security force members were the intended target.
The 29-year-old, originally from Newry, was unarmed and unmasked at the time. He was shot several times on open ground by an undercover RUC member. He was taken to hospital but died during emergency surgery.
In 2023 the Public Prosecution Service decided not to prosecute the retired RUC officer, known as Officer B, who fired the fatal shots.
The Irish News can now reveal that two other members of the IRA unit escaped that night.
SAS and MI5 roles in police killing of IRA man revealed
Marie Anderson’s office provided members of the Marks family with two reports, one arising from a complaint lodged by relatives and a second sparked by a referral from the PSNI. While neither has been made public, the response to the referral contains fresh information about the role played by the SAS and MI5.
MI5 Device
Mrs Anderson’s report suggests that MI5, sometimes referred to as Box, deployed a “device” as a part of the operation. Under a heading ‘reasons for referral’, the ombudsman’s document said Police Officer B “has alleged that he knows of SAS involvement in this operation, the origin of the intelligence, the address of the MI5 device and the name of the box officer who removed it.”
Police Officer B was also critical of the RUC’s Headquarters Mobile Support Unit (HMSU), which was attached to Special Branch, claiming its “plan and ground actions were a ‘total shambles’.”
The report sets out that Police Officer B also claimed he was almost killed by his own colleagues.
“Police Officer B further claims that he was almost shot twice during the operation by a member of two different HMSU teams which he believes could have been averted if identification proposals he had previously made had been implemented and were subsequently implemented after the incident,” the report states.
It has also emerged that a specialist unit carried out an undercover surveillance operation for three days before Marks was shot dead.
The ombudsman has now confirmed the area was declared ‘out of bounds’, meaning “no passing security force patrols should have been at risk from the mortar”.
The operation involved the RUC’s South Region Tactical Co-ordinating Group (TCG).
Colum Marks was shot dead in 1991
Mrs Anderson confirmed that “all records relating to the planning, direction and control of the operation appear to have been destroyed many years ago”.
A principal function of TCG was to oversee undercover operations.
It was previously known that Police Officer B was allegedly asked to lie if questioned about events after the killing.
Mrs Anderson has now revealed that the officer claimed in a 2017 text message to a colleague he was “asked to lie by both my team inspector and team sergeant”.
The contents of the message were later reported by the second officer to her line manager before they were referred to the ombudsman for investigation.
In her report, Mrs Andeson said Officer B “has been inconsistent in accounts” provided to her office.
She said the 1991 RUC investigation into the killing “lacked independence and rigour” and was “wholly inadequate in a number of important respects”.
She added that from the evidence available, there was a short window of opportunity to arrest Marks “when he was first observed carrying the mortar” and when a later “instruction was given to arrest him”.
Gavin Booth, of Phoenix Law, who represents the Marks family, said the ombudsman report “supports the view that the family always held that the RUC did not properly investigate the fatal shooting of Colum Marks”.
Opportunity to arrest suspect
“It’s clear from the findings that there was time to arrest Colum prior to the shooting and this was not acted upon by the RUC at the time,” he said.
“We now know that for three days the RUC knew about this, and opportunities clearly existed to arrest.”
Sinn Féin’s Martin McGuinness carried the coffin of Colum Marks at his funeral.
Mr Booth said Marks “was unarmed, unmasked and not posing a threat when he was shot several times”.
There was controversy in 2023 when former DUP MP Ian Paisley Jnr used parliamentary privilege to describe the solicitor acting on behalf of the Marks family as a “certain shameful snake-oil salesman”.
It is believed Mr Paisley was referring to Mr Booth, a well-known solicitor and partner in his law firm.
South Down Sinn Féin MP Chris Hazzard said: “These findings support what Colum’s family and the entire community knew all along – that he was unarmed, unmasked and not posing a threat when he was executed.”
Ombudsman Challenged over verdict in 1991 police shooting of PIRA Volunteer
By Iain Gray and PA, Belfast News Letter, March 18th, 2025
Police Ombudsman Marie Anderson has been slammed over her verdict into the case of an IRA man killed while on a mortar mission.
Colum Marks was shot by an RUC officer on April 10, 1991, in Downpatrick. He died later in hospital.
The shooting happened during a counter-terrorism operation designed to thwart a planned IRA mortar attack on security forces.
In yet another controversial verdict on Troubles legacy issues, ombudsman Marie Anderson declared the police’s investigation into the shooting “wholly inadequate”, and said that opportunities to apprehend the IRA man may have been missed as there was a gap of close to 20 minutes between Marks being seen carrying the mortar and the RUC deciding to arrest him.
Now the TUV has slammed the police ombudsman’s verdict, accusing her of “playing to the anti-police gallery” by “blackening the good name of the RUC”.
Party secretary Ann McClure described the conclusions on the Marks case as “yet another report seriously lacking in balance”, and pointed to a High Court ruling last month that the ombudsman exceeded her legal powers in making findings of collusive behaviour by RUC officers in a series of loyalist murders.
Mrs Anderson has said she would appeal that ruling, but Ms McClure argues it was severe enough to warrant her resignation.
“One might have hoped that she would have learned from the recent High Court judgment, which should have called time on her desire to always play to the anti-police gallery, but clearly not,” she said.
“Then, of course, the ombudsman would have resigned in light of that judgment. She didn’t and is still delivering ridiculous findings which attempt to blacken the good name of the RUC.”
The TUV party secretary reinforced that Colum Marks was a member of proscribed organisation actively involved in terrorist acts when he was killed, stating: “There is no dispute about the fact that, had he not been shot, Marks would have been involved in a mortar attack which was designed to result in murder.
“No finding by the discredited ombudsman should be permitted to obscure the reality driven home simply by restating the facts of the case.”
High risk strategy
Most of the records detailing the management of the covert anti-terror operation in the Marks incident have been destroyed, with the ombudsman stating the absence of such records “severely hampered” her investigation.
The IRA man was seen carrying what appeared to be a mortar at 9.29pm on April 10, 1991. At 9.47pm, officers were instructed to arrest the man, who fled the scene across a recreation ground, at which point the shooting occurred.
The ombudsman said: “It is clear that police intended to arrest suspects in circumstances that connected them to the weapon, and the intent to commit an unlawful act, rather than possession of the weapon alone.
“In the presence of what was described as a viable explosive device, it is my view that this was a high-risk strategy on the part of police, whose primary duty was to protect life.”
While the family of Mr Marks have claimed there was a conspiracy involved in his death, the ombudsman said she could find no evidence of one.
Two years ago, the Public Prosecution Service concluded there was no realistic chance of convicting the officer who shot the IRA man.
