
Madden & Finucane
Ranked
Number 1
by Chambers,
the clients guide
to the legal profession
Chambers and Partners have been publishing their
world-famous guides to the legal profession since 1990. The key to the success
of their legal directories and the validity of their awards is the in-depth,
unbiased research conducted by their team of highly qualified and experienced
researchers. View more

Madden & Finucane
present
the Madden & Finucane
and Pat Finucane
Aisling Awards
The Aisling Bursaries, launched in March 2000, are
an educational initiative between Belfast Media Group and West Belfast
Partnership. The Aisling Bursaries are designed to help students defray their
education and training costs.
View
more
|
|
Relatives 'furious' after judge clears police of negligence
01 February 1997 --
THE RUC was cleared yesterday of any financial liability
arising out of the killing of three men by a deranged policeman in west Belfast
five years ago.
In the High Court in Belfast Mr Justice Pringle held that the force had no duty
of care to the three men shot dead by constable Allen Moore (24), in Sinn Fein
offices on February 4 1992.
The judge said that having regard to the large number of unidentifiable
potential victims, there was no special relationship between the victims and the
police. Patrick Loughran (60), Michael O'Dwyer (21) and Patrick McBride (40)
were killed when constable Moore opened up with his pump-action shotgun which he
later turned on himself. Mr Justice Pringle dismissed appeals against a Master's
decision to strike out compensation claims against the RUC because there was no
reasonable cause of action. The judge recalled that on the day before the
shootings, Moore had fired shots over a colleague's grave. He was arrested and
his police revolver was taken from him as he was found to be drunk. But later he
was allowed to leave Newtownabbey RUC station unhindered. He returned there
shortly afterwards and was again allowed to leave - this time with his shotgun.
Ten minutes later he entered the Sinn Fein office and blasted the three men to
death and injured two others. Mr Justice Pringle said the substance of the claim
was that the police had been negligent. It was argued that other police should
have kept Moore in custody and secured his shotgun as they knew his disturbed
state of mind and also his declared intention to shoot people he believed were
republicans. The crown relied on a House of Lords judgment in the Yorkshire
Ripper case where it was held that the mother of his last victim had no
reasonable cause of action on the ground of negligence by police in failing to
detect Peter Sutcliffe before her daughter was murdered. Mr Justice Pringle said
in that case there had been reference to the "best endeavours" of the police in
the performance of their function. "In the present case some officers may have
used their best endeavours, but some clearly did not," said the judge. "It is
difficult to see that in the extreme circumstances of the present case it is in
the public interest that the police should have immunity from possible
liability." "If this had been the only issue I would have allowed the actions to
proceed although uncertain of success." Afterwards the victims' relatives issued
a statement asking: "If the law cannot protect us, who can? The judge's opinion
and the law is that the RUC owe no duty of care for the community. "In other
words, the RUC just sit back and let one of their members kill whoever from the
wider community. "Because of this judgment it won't cost them a penny."
Solicitor Eamon McMenamin, from Madden and Finucane, said his clients had
instructed him to appeal and he was considering the 10-page judgment in relation
to the grounds of appeal.
|
|
more..
|
|



|