Skip to main content
  • 128 Accesses

Abstract

The extent to which the Widgery Tribunal of Inquiry had achieved the vital and onerous task entrusted to it would be determined by the contents of its report. Would this report satisfy the public that the full facts about Bloody Sunday had been established convincingly? Did it identify those who were culpable, and the extent to which they were culpable, in a manner which would restore public confidence, and the confidence of the nationalist community in particular, in the integrity of government? Alternatively, did it convincingly prove that neither the soldiers nor their masters in the political and security establishments were at fault for the deaths and injuries inflicted that day? If it did expose wrongdoing or failures at any of these levels, did it clear the way for the necessary remedial and/or punitive action to be taken to ensure that justice was not only done but also seen to be done? These are the basic questions which have to be asked in order to determine whether the tribunal was a success.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 56.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. Widgery Report, paras. 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ibid., para. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See also B. McMahon, ‘The Impaired Asset: A Legal Commentary on the Widgery Tribunal’, La Domaine Humain (The Human Context) vol. VI, no. 3 (1974), p. 683.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Widgery Report, paras 61–104.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ibid., paras 89–104.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ibid., para. 102.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ibid., Summary of Conclusions 1.

    Google Scholar 

  8. McMahon, op. cit., p. 685.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Widgery Report, paras 31–4.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ibid., para. 33.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ibid., para. 34.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ibid., para. 95.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ibid., para. 102.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ibid., para. 94.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A dum dum bullet can be made by filing a cross on the head of a regular bullet. The bullet shatters on impact and causes massive internal damage.

    Google Scholar 

  16. See also Bloody Sunday and the Report of the Widgery Tribunal: The Irish Government’s Assessment of the New Material (presented to the British Government in June 1997), pp. 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Widgery Report, para. 54.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ibid., para. 97.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ibid., para. 104.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ibid., para. 85.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ibid., para. 64.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2000 Dermot P. J. Walsh

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Walsh, D.P.J. (2000). A Flawed Report. In: Bloody Sunday and the Rule of Law in Northern Ireland. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230514461_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics