DETECTIVE DENIES ALTERING NOTES
Detective denies altering notes
ONE of the detectives in the Omagh bomb investigation yesterday rejected any suggestion that police interview notes were altered during the inquiry.
Gerry McLoughlin also told the High Court in Belfast that a man who claimed he lent his mobile phone to a suspect the day before the attack had lied throughout days of questioning.
During cross-examination Dermot Fee QC, for Colm Murphy - one of five men being sued by relatives of some of the 29 people killed in the terrorist atrocity - focused on the apparent conflicting accounts given by his client and Patrick Morgan.
Mr Morgan, who worked as a building site foreman for Murphy, told RUC detectives he gave his boss the phone which police believe was used in the car which took the bomb into Omagh on August 15, 1998.
But his version of events during questioning months after the explosion contrasted with what Murphy, who was being held simultaneously in the Irish Republic, appeared to be telling gardai, the court heard.
Referring to interview notes where his client states he was in Dublin on August 14, Mr Fee asked the officer if he could explain why Mr Morgan was being told something different.
The barrister said: "I take it Mr McLoughlin if I was to suggest you had altered this information for your own purpose, to try and put pressure on Mr Morgan, that's not something you would do."
Mr McLoughlin, a detective constable at the time of the investigation, replied: "Not at all." He was equally emphatic when defence counsel continued: "All you can say is 'I was given information by someone further up the chain'."
The trial continues.
ONE of the detectives in the Omagh bomb investigation yesterday rejected any suggestion that police interview notes were altered during the inquiry.
Gerry McLoughlin also told the High Court in Belfast that a man who claimed he lent his mobile phone to a suspect the day before the attack had lied throughout days of questioning.
During cross-examination Dermot Fee QC, for Colm Murphy - one of five men being sued by relatives of some of the 29 people killed in the terrorist atrocity - focused on the apparent conflicting accounts given by his client and Patrick Morgan.
Mr Morgan, who worked as a building site foreman for Murphy, told RUC detectives he gave his boss the phone which police believe was used in the car which took the bomb into Omagh on August 15, 1998.
But his version of events during questioning months after the explosion contrasted with what Murphy, who was being held simultaneously in the Irish Republic, appeared to be telling gardai, the court heard.
Referring to interview notes where his client states he was in Dublin on August 14, Mr Fee asked the officer if he could explain why Mr Morgan was being told something different.
The barrister said: "I take it Mr McLoughlin if I was to suggest you had altered this information for your own purpose, to try and put pressure on Mr Morgan, that's not something you would do."
Mr McLoughlin, a detective constable at the time of the investigation, replied: "Not at all." He was equally emphatic when defence counsel continued: "All you can say is 'I was given information by someone further up the chain'."
The trial continues.
Further Information
Publisher: THE IRISH NEWS
Ref: IN/0952
Published Date: 19-Jun-08
Related Images
There have been no images archived for this article.