There were sharp exchanges at Omagh Magistrates’ Court for the latest hearing in the case of the attempted murder of former DCI John Caldwell.
The now-retired senior officer was shot whilst coaching a youth football team at a sports complex in Omagh on February 22, 2023, with the New IRA claiming responsibility.
Until November last year 16 men were charged in connection with the incident of which seven are accused of attempted murder, and the rest face various related allegations.
The addition of a seventeenth defendant appears to have delayed progress for the others whose lawyers voiced concerns even before the most recent arrest.
District Judge Conor Heaney was provided with a chronology of the case by the PPS who explained only the final file is awaited which is due imminently but “this will require consideration before any realistic indication of when a decision can be expected, Decisions in principle are ready for the other (16) defendants.”
He requested a four-week adjournment to provide a “more meaningful update”.
However, defence barrister, Eoghan Devlin KC pointed out the High Court has explicitly noted that other people being added to an investigation should not cause delay.
While ideally all defendants would be returned for trial together, he said: “It’s not necessarily so. This is clearly a very unusual case and of some similarity to the Lyra McKee murder with many less defendants. It’s unlikely all in this case will be tried together. Five deadlines have been missed. The PPS have now changed tack by saying this is a very complex case therefore the court will wait for us.”
Mr Devlin continued: “Going by the performance to date we could still be here in a year. Once the papers are finally served it will take months for the defence to read so we may even still be here in two years. It’s an unconscionable delay. This court could have no faith in the PPS meeting any deadlines. We are simply asking for the papers to be served in the cases which are ready – nothing more, nothing less. We could start into those immediately and save many months. The PPS now have a different strategy saying they cannot be compelled to do anything and the court will just have to suck that up.”
In terms of splitting the cases, prosecution counsel said: “Some defendants have been reported but others have been charged. The PPS will be taking the charged defendants forward for trial together. The size, scale and complexity of this case is a completely interlinked narrative. It cannot be divvied out. That’s not feasible.”
Judge Heaney noted various targets have been missed and opted for a shorter adjournment of three weeks when a timetable is to be provided.
While accepting targets were missed the prosecution contended: “A serving police officer was gunned down without warning. Police reacted and responded which is reflected in the sheer scale of the case. The court has to approach from that perspective. I do not expect to have a timetable in three weeks.”
The judge replied: “To be absolutely clear, the court wants a clear indication of progress. That has to be the focus. The court will closely supervise how that progress is achieved.”
The prosecution replied that once the final file is received an estimate will be made on how much time is required to reach a decision.
“There will be case preparation, and papers will be served. At that point the PPS will be ready to go, but the defence will inevitably require time. Nobody knows how long that will take because they haven’t got them yet. The PPS can answer questions at their end, but not those which are in the hands of the defence.”
However, Judge Heaney stood firm and adjourning until February 17 warned: “I want an update and will review the overall case progress.”
