BOMB TRIAL OFFICER MOVED
Bomb trial officer is moved
AN officer accused of lying during the Omagh bomb trial has been "repositioned" within the PSNI, police said last night.
The officer in question has been moved to different duties after a recommendation by the Police Ombudsman.
Another officer also accused of misleading the court during the trial of South Armagh man Sean Hoey has been allowed to remain in their present role. It is understood the duties currently being performed by the second officer comply with restrictions advised by the Ombudsman's office.
Hoey, 38, from Jonesborough, was last month cleared of all charges related to the 1998 bombing and a series of other dissident republican attacks.
The Ombudsman's office was asked by trial judge Mr Justice Weir to investigate the conduct of the two officers.
It is understood it has now extended its investigations to look at the involvement of other officers.
Files on the two officers who gave evidence has been passed to the Public Prosecution Service to see if there are grounds for bringing criminal charges against them.
In his damning judgment, Mr Justice Weir accused the two officers of having made "a deliberate and calculated attempt" to mislead the court by "beefing up" their evidence.
They had been involved in collecting items at the scene of a dissident republican bomb discovered in Altmore Forest in Co Tyrone in 2001.
Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde had faced criticism for not suspending the officers pending the outcome of the Ombudsman's investigation.
However, he said the decision to suspend the officers lay with the Ombudsman's office and pledged to act on any recommendation it gave.
A police spokesman said last night: "The PSNI has reviewed the duties currently performed by two officers who were referred to in Mr Justice Weir's judgment of December 20, 2007 in The Queen v Sean Hoey.
"In order to comply with the Police Ombudsman's recommendation, one officer has been repositioned.
"The other officer's duties currently fall within the restrictions required and repositioning is not necessary."
AN officer accused of lying during the Omagh bomb trial has been "repositioned" within the PSNI, police said last night.
The officer in question has been moved to different duties after a recommendation by the Police Ombudsman.
Another officer also accused of misleading the court during the trial of South Armagh man Sean Hoey has been allowed to remain in their present role. It is understood the duties currently being performed by the second officer comply with restrictions advised by the Ombudsman's office.
Hoey, 38, from Jonesborough, was last month cleared of all charges related to the 1998 bombing and a series of other dissident republican attacks.
The Ombudsman's office was asked by trial judge Mr Justice Weir to investigate the conduct of the two officers.
It is understood it has now extended its investigations to look at the involvement of other officers.
Files on the two officers who gave evidence has been passed to the Public Prosecution Service to see if there are grounds for bringing criminal charges against them.
In his damning judgment, Mr Justice Weir accused the two officers of having made "a deliberate and calculated attempt" to mislead the court by "beefing up" their evidence.
They had been involved in collecting items at the scene of a dissident republican bomb discovered in Altmore Forest in Co Tyrone in 2001.
Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde had faced criticism for not suspending the officers pending the outcome of the Ombudsman's investigation.
However, he said the decision to suspend the officers lay with the Ombudsman's office and pledged to act on any recommendation it gave.
A police spokesman said last night: "The PSNI has reviewed the duties currently performed by two officers who were referred to in Mr Justice Weir's judgment of December 20, 2007 in The Queen v Sean Hoey.
"In order to comply with the Police Ombudsman's recommendation, one officer has been repositioned.
"The other officer's duties currently fall within the restrictions required and repositioning is not necessary."
Further Information
Publisher: NEWS LETTER
Ref: NL/719
Published Date: 17-Jan-08
Related Images
There have been no images archived for this article.