This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/northern_ireland/7497264.stm

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Omagh judge remarks 'speculation' Omagh judge remarks 'speculation'
(about 2 hours later)
A report for the Policing Board has accused the Omagh trial judge of indulging in speculation in criticisms of some of the prosecution case.A report for the Policing Board has accused the Omagh trial judge of indulging in speculation in criticisms of some of the prosecution case.
Mr Justice Weir was critical of police evidence and said they were guilty of a "deliberate and calculated deception".Mr Justice Weir was critical of police evidence and said they were guilty of a "deliberate and calculated deception".
The Policing Board, which holds the police to account, commissioned an independent review after the judge's damning verdict last December.The Policing Board, which holds the police to account, commissioned an independent review after the judge's damning verdict last December.
The report, adopted by majority view, questioned the judge's comments.The report, adopted by majority view, questioned the judge's comments.
Sir Dan Crompton and David Blakey, both former chief constables and ex-HM Inspectors of Constabulary, were appointed to examine issues arising from the judgement after south Armagh man Sean Hoey was cleared of 58 charges, including the murders of 29 people in the 1998 Real IRA attack.Sir Dan Crompton and David Blakey, both former chief constables and ex-HM Inspectors of Constabulary, were appointed to examine issues arising from the judgement after south Armagh man Sean Hoey was cleared of 58 charges, including the murders of 29 people in the 1998 Real IRA attack.
They said it had been a very difficult and long running trial for Mr Justice Weir with a requirement to handle huge volumes of information - some of it highly contentious.They said it had been a very difficult and long running trial for Mr Justice Weir with a requirement to handle huge volumes of information - some of it highly contentious.
'Rigorously examined''Rigorously examined'
However, they took issue with the part of the judgement which said others involved in the investigation and preparation of the case may have been involved in the deliberate and calculated deception.However, they took issue with the part of the judgement which said others involved in the investigation and preparation of the case may have been involved in the deliberate and calculated deception.
"We were left wondering why this passage was included in the judgement. In such a high-profile case every single word, finding, or suggestion is likely to be rigorously examined by interested parties."We were left wondering why this passage was included in the judgement. In such a high-profile case every single word, finding, or suggestion is likely to be rigorously examined by interested parties.
Mr Justice Weir was critical of some police evidence He registered his concern that others may have been involved and he has left it to other agencies to investigated and determine whether that is the case Lord chief justice's office on Mr Justice Weir
"We conclude that the judgement in this respect amounted to speculation by Mr Justice Weir, but we (and others) are left uninformed as to what triggered that speculation.""We conclude that the judgement in this respect amounted to speculation by Mr Justice Weir, but we (and others) are left uninformed as to what triggered that speculation."
The two police officers were accused in the trial by defence lawyers of having "beefed up" statements - a term taken up later by the judge which the report said could have more than one interpretation.The two police officers were accused in the trial by defence lawyers of having "beefed up" statements - a term taken up later by the judge which the report said could have more than one interpretation.
"At its worst, the term can describe an attempt to wrongfully bolster a statement to the point of including untruths, or manufacturing, manipulating and embellishing evidence to cover gaps in the prosecution case," they said."At its worst, the term can describe an attempt to wrongfully bolster a statement to the point of including untruths, or manufacturing, manipulating and embellishing evidence to cover gaps in the prosecution case," they said.
But, they said, there could be a far different meaning where a review of evidence could reveal gaps in evidence and omissions.But, they said, there could be a far different meaning where a review of evidence could reveal gaps in evidence and omissions.
Mr Justice Weir was critical of some police evidence
"It is neither bad practice nor professional 'slight of hand' to rectify such omissions, provided additions to statements represent fact, with honesty being an underlying feature," they said."It is neither bad practice nor professional 'slight of hand' to rectify such omissions, provided additions to statements represent fact, with honesty being an underlying feature," they said.
The review also backed a decision by a PSNI deputy chief constable not to suspend the two officers from duty after the judge's criticism of them and referral of the case to the Police Ombudsman.The review also backed a decision by a PSNI deputy chief constable not to suspend the two officers from duty after the judge's criticism of them and referral of the case to the Police Ombudsman.
Lord Chief Justice Sir Brian Kerr said in a statement that Mr Justice Weir "considered that the nature of the evidence given by the two individuals he identified in the judgement raised the possibility of the involvement of others".
Sir Brian said the trial judge "did not speculate that others were involved, much less who such others might be.
"He registered his concern that others may have been involved and he has left it to other agencies to investigated and determine whether that is the case."
Sinn Féin Policing Board member Martina Anderson said the report "lacked substance in a number of key areas, had been published without reference to other outstanding reports and left unanswered many questions raised by the trial judge".
"The manner in which this report has been completed and published undermines public confidence in the role of the Policing Board to effectively hold the PSNI to account," she added.