‘McGrory must call PSNI to reopen Teebane file’

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Barra McGrory QC
The Director of Public Prosecutions, Barra McGrory QC

A relative of one of the men killed at Teebane has expressed anger at what he sees as a one-sided investigation of Northern Ireland’s Troubles.

Fearing for his own personal safety, he declined to be identified. However he pointed out that Chief Constable George Hamilton told terror victims at a meeting in Enniskillen in March 2016 that the “majority” of his resources were taken up by cases he was directed to investigate by Director of Public Prosecutions, Barra McGrory.

The Teebane relative told the News Letter: “Barra McGrory has requested the PSNI investigate eight legacy Troubles case – four of which relate to the MRF. Mr McGrory is asking Chief Constable to investigate these.

“Well I would like to see Barra McGrory asking the PSNI to open this case into Teebane as well.”

The Public Prosecution Service has firmly rejected any suggestion of bias. It said last night that a some of the recent controversial cases had been referred to the director of public prosecutions (Mr McGrory) by the attorney general and have been subject of investigation by PSNI Legacy Branch.

“When these investigation files are submitted to the PPS, the test for prosecution is applied without fear, favour or prejudice, in strict accordance with the Code for Prosecutors,” the PPS said.

Former DUP MP Rev William McCrea has stood by the Teebane families for 25 years and says he is keen to see their investigation wishes fulfilled. He noted that HET recovered low copy DNA from two items from the Teebane detonation point but that the tests failed sufficient quality for prosecution. A fingerprint was recovered from a roll of tape but no match has been made.

It is understood HET found four of the main suspects were questioned but that suspect nine could not be found and no attempt was made to arrest five suspects from Omagh.

Det Supt Jason Murphy said police tested a number of items for DNA in 2002 but did not identify a DNA profile from which suspects could be identified. HET carried out a fresh DNA review in 2010 “but this did not identify any further opportunities to progress the investigation,” he added.