🔗 Share this article

January 30th, 1972 remains among the most fatal – and momentous – days during thirty years of conflict in the region.

Within the community where events unfolded – the memories of the tragic events are displayed on the buildings and seared in people's minds.

A public gathering was conducted on a wintry, sunny day in the city.

The march was opposing the practice of imprisonment without charges – detaining individuals without legal proceedings – which had been put in place in response to three years of violence.

Troops from the specialized division killed thirteen individuals in the district – which was, and remains, a predominantly Irish nationalist area.

One image became especially prominent.

Images showed a religious figure, the priest, using a stained with blood fabric as he tried to shield a crowd moving a young man, the injured teenager, who had been mortally injured.

Journalists captured considerable film on the day.

Historical records features the priest informing a media representative that military personnel "just seemed to discharge weapons randomly" and he was "completely sure" that there was no provocation for the gunfire.

This account of the incident was rejected by the first inquiry.

The Widgery Tribunal found the Army had been attacked first.

During the peace process, the ruling party commissioned another inquiry, in response to advocacy by family members, who said Widgery had been a cover-up.

In 2010, the findings by the investigation said that generally, the paratroopers had fired first and that none of the victims had been armed.

The then head of state, David Cameron, apologised in the government chamber – saying deaths were "without justification and unacceptable."

Law enforcement started to investigate the matter.

A military veteran, referred to as the defendant, was charged for murder.

Indictments were filed over the deaths of James Wray, in his twenties, and 26-year-old another victim.

The defendant was additionally charged of seeking to harm several people, other civilians, further individuals, Michael Quinn, and an unknown person.

Exists a legal order maintaining the soldier's privacy, which his lawyers have claimed is required because he is at risk of attack.

He told the examination that he had solely shot at persons who were armed.

The statement was rejected in the concluding document.

Information from the investigation could not be used straightforwardly as testimony in the criminal process.

In court, the defendant was shielded from sight behind a protective barrier.

He made statements for the opening instance in the proceedings at a session in late 2024, to answer "not responsible" when the accusations were put to him.

Family members of the deceased on that day made the trip from the city to the judicial building each day of the case.

John Kelly, whose brother Michael was died, said they always knew that attending the proceedings would be emotional.

"I can see the events in my recollection," John said, as we examined the primary sites referenced in the case – from the location, where Michael was fatally wounded, to the nearby the area, where one victim and the second person were killed.

"It returns me to my location that day.

"I participated in moving Michael and lay him in the ambulance.

"I went through the entire event during the proceedings.

"Despite experiencing all that – it's still worthwhile for me."