CHAPTER FIVE

--------------------
FLAWS IN THE INQUEST
--------------------


Added to all the other obstacles placed in the way of finding out the
truth about Gibraltar must be the rules and conduct of the inquest
itself.

The rules governing the inquest were effectively another weapon in the
government arsenal. They already had everything else - limitless
resources of money and experts, the press, the threats to witnesses,
the Public Interest Immunity Certificates, the absence of the Spanish
evidence. And finally, on top of all this, the families faced the
absolutely unequal contest of the inquest.

It should be noted that the families of the three had no legal aid.
This is the case with inquests. Not only did this mean that they had
to find the money to get to and maintain themselves in Gibraltar but
also all the legal bills and the cost of flying out witnesses. Whilst
the government spent millions of pounds of taxpayers money shoring up
their case, the families were at a complete disadvantage. For example,
after one of the families' expert witnesses had left Gibraltar, the
Crown recalled one of their own witnesses to testify on difficult and
technical matters. McGrory had no expert to advise him. According to
Inquest's[*] report on the inquest, it was strongly suggested that the
reason was a financial one.

Four days before the inquest began, the price of a transcript of each
day's proceedings was raised from 50p per sheet to 5 pounds. A day's
transcript could be at least 100 pages, that is GBP500 per day. The
Ministry of Defence ordered five copies, that is more than GBP50,000
worth for the whole inquest. But the families could not afford one
copy. Yet to be able to consult the official version of evidence is,
of course, vital. It is worth asking why the Gibraltar Attorney
General felt it necessary to raise the price of the transcript.

The screening and anonymity of government witnesses was accepted. Not
only the SAS but also M15 officers and even some of the Gibraltar
police were hidden behind screens. This made it very difficult for
observers to judge the demeanour of the witnesses and therefore assess
their truthfulness. Already this previously unheard-of practice has
become standard. The inquest into the shoot-to-kill victims of 1982
thus had witnesses screened from view.

The selection of the jury was such that two senior civil servants of
Higher Executive Officer grade were on it. One of them was foreman.
The Coroner rejected the families' lawyers' arguments that there
should be no jury given the extent of adverse publicity about the case
and witnesses. He also rejected efforts to have people in Crown
service rejected.

Although the govemment/SAS lawyers had access to the statements of all
the witnesses, the families' lawyers had no advance access to the
statements of the military/security personnel. The lawyers were
therefore forced to question these witnesses without the possibility
of advance preparation. Barrister Paddy McGrory had little warning of
which witnesses were to be called or what they would say. Inevitably
this led to certain points being missed which could have influenced
the jury.

The powerful role of Coroner's officer at the inquest was given to
Detective Chief Inspector Correa. It also happened that Correa was
appointed officer in charge of the police investigation into the
killings. For a police officer from the force involved in the
operation to play such a key role in both the inquest and the police
investigation is bad enough. Correa would have had access to and
knowledge of all witness statements and other evidence. The situation
is even worse than it appears since it has now become known that
Correa was given the role of investigator by the Gibraltar police
before the operation was carried out, that is, before there was
anything to investigate. Correa was part of the Gibraltar police team
for the operation and may even have attended briefings about it. Yet
the Ministry of Defence claims that Correa was completely unaware of
the operation against the three until it was over!

The Coroner ruled out an open verdict. This meant that the jury had no
choice other than lawful or unlawful killing. The Coroner told the
jury that unless they were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the
verdict was unlawful killing then it had to be lawful killing. Further
the Coroner directed the jury that they must not make recommendations
or add a rider to their verdict. Yet this is one of their rights.

Further, the Coroner put unreasonable pressure on the jury to reach
its verdict. The jury was sent out at 11.30am. At 5.20pm, less than
six hours later, the Coroner recalled them and told them it was
'reaching the edge' of what was a reasonable time to reach a verdict.
Less than six hours to consider three-and-a-half-weeks of evidence,
much of it contradictory and technical. He appeared to give them an
ultimatum that they must reach a verdict by 7pm. In fact it was their
right to take as long as they needed to consider the case, especially
given the foreman's statement that they were deadlocked. However, the
pressure worked and a majority verdict was reached by 7.15pm.

According to observers at the inquest the unreasonable behaviour of
the Coroner on the last day was in marked contrast to his previous
behaviour. It is reported that the government lawyers were applying
pressure and had said that they would seek to get the jury discharged
if there was no verdict by 7.15pm. This would have meant another
inquest.

The government and its lawyers must have been seriously alarmed by the
report that the jury was deadlocked. Everything rested on the jury
reaching the verdict the government had worked for six months to
achieve. If necessary they would have faced a new inquest rather than
a verdict of unlawful killing. Hence the pressure they reportedly
exercised to get a verdict by 7pm.

Mr Pizzarello's prediction of a flawed inquest was true in more senses
than he had meant. Yet this unequal contest was, as the British
government determined, to be the only inquiry into three murders.

[*] -   'The Gibraltar Inquest Report' by Jill Tweedie, published by
        Inquest.