🔗 Share this article

January 30th, 1972 is remembered as among the most deadly – and consequential – occasions during three decades of unrest in this area.

In the streets of the incident – the memories of Bloody Sunday are painted on the buildings and seared in collective memory.

A public gathering was held on a chilly yet clear period in the city.

The demonstration was challenging the policy of detention without trial – imprisoning people without legal proceedings – which had been established after multiple years of unrest.

Soldiers from the specialized division fatally wounded 13 people in the district – which was, and still is, a predominantly republican area.

A particular photograph became particularly prominent.

Photographs showed a Catholic priest, Fr Edward Daly, displaying a stained with blood fabric while attempting to defend a group transporting a teenager, the fatally wounded individual, who had been mortally injured.

News camera operators documented considerable film on the day.

Historical records features Fr Daly informing a media representative that soldiers "just seemed to discharge weapons randomly" and he was "completely sure" that there was no reason for the discharge of weapons.

That version of events was rejected by the first inquiry.

The first investigation determined the soldiers had been fired upon initially.

In the peace process, the administration established another inquiry, after campaigning by bereaved relatives, who said the first investigation had been a cover-up.

That year, the findings by the inquiry said that on balance, the paratroopers had fired first and that not one of the casualties had been armed.

The contemporary government leader, David Cameron, issued an apology in the government chamber – saying fatalities were "unjustified and unjustifiable."

Authorities started to investigate the matter.

An ex-soldier, known as the accused, was brought to trial for killing.

Indictments were filed concerning the fatalities of one victim, 22, and 26-year-old William McKinney.

Soldier F was additionally charged of seeking to harm multiple individuals, other civilians, further individuals, another person, and an unknown person.

Exists a judicial decision protecting the defendant's anonymity, which his lawyers have claimed is required because he is at risk of attack.

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

This assertion was rejected in the official findings.

Information from the investigation was unable to be used straightforwardly as evidence in the legal proceedings.

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

He made statements for the initial occasion in the hearing at a proceeding in that month, to respond "not guilty" when the allegations were presented.

Family members of the deceased on the incident travelled from the city to the courthouse every day of the proceedings.

A family member, whose brother Michael was fatally wounded, said they always knew that listening to the trial would be difficult.

"I visualize the events in my memory," the relative said, as we examined the key areas discussed in the trial – from the location, where his brother was shot dead, to the adjoining the area, where one victim and William McKinney were killed.

"It even takes me back to my location that day.

"I participated in moving Michael and place him in the medical transport.

"I went through the entire event during the testimony.

"But even with having to go through everything – it's still meaningful for me."