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
|
|
Press statement from the family of Kathleen Thompson
29th September 2004 --
A High Court judge today (Wednesday) rejected a judicial review taken by the
family of Kathleen Thompson who was shot by British soldiers in the back garden
of her Derry home in 1971. Last year a judge ruled that there had been no
effective RUC investigation into her murder. The family had challenged a number
of decisions made by the Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to the
death of their mother;
- the sufficiency of the reasons provided by the Director for his refusal to
prosecute soldier D or any other person,
- the refusal to undertake a formal review of the original decision,
- the refusal of the Director to direct the Chief Constable to undertake
further investigations.
Judge Girvan ruled that soldier D had a self-defence plea available and also
that the Thompson family should have appealed the original August 1972 decision
within three months.
Speaking at a press conference in the Pat Finucane Centre, Billy Thompson, son
of the deceased said,
“How can the self-defence argument be described as rational when no
investigation took place – soldier D was never even questioned by the RUC. So
why has the DPP claimed that their decision was made on the basis of an
investigation file when no investigation took place. Judge Girvan has claimed,
quote,
‘It was apparent from the information available to him (DPP) that a police
investigation had been conducted.”
We, the Thompson family, totally reject the claim that any police investigation
took place and the present Lord Chief Justice ruled last year that no police
investigation had taken place.
This morning the judge ruled that we should have appealed this decision in 1972.
How could we appeal a decision in 1972 when know one told us any decision had
been made? No-one ever knocked on our door. Neither the DPP nor the RUC ever
contacted us.
The issue here is the refusal of the DPP to put his hands up and admit that he
was and is wrong. The present Director is playing Pontius Pilate with our
family. We don’t want revenge. The issue isn’t soldier D. It’s the cover-up that
happened afterwards. The RUC didn’t investigate and the DPP accepted this. We
don’t accept it and we will fight this decision as far as it can go.
|
|
more..
|
|
|