Murdered councillor’s family failed by ‘wholly inadequate’ investigation

Marie Anderson said the actions of some officers were also indicative of “collusive behaviour”.

Mr Kelly was last seen alive in the early hours of July 24 1974 as he drove away from the Corner Bar in Trillick, Co Tyrone, where he worked.

His body was found in Lough Eyes, near Lisbellaw, in Co Fermanagh, three weeks later on August 10. He had been shot six times.

While loyalist paramilitaries claimed responsibility for the murder, the Kelly family believe the killing was perpetrated by members of an Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR) army patrol.

No one has ever been charged or prosecuted over the murder.

Among the failings identified by the Police Ombudsman, she found that a senior investigating RUC officer showed “latent” investigative bias.

Mrs Anderson also concluded that the withholding of intelligence on potential UDR suspects from the murder investigation team and the failure to act on intelligence about an active UVF unit in the Fermanagh area was indicative of “collusive behaviour” on the part of RUC Special Branch and a police division commander who was responsible for oversight of the investigation.

The Kelly family welcomed the ombudsman’s report and said it vindicated their almost 50-year campaign for justice. They have called for a fresh inquest into the killing.

Mrs Anderson said there was a series of “significant” investigative failings.

These included a failure to adequately verify the alibis of UDR members and failure to record detailed witness statements; a failure to draw links with previous attacks in the area; and forensic failure to make inquiries about footwear marks at the abduction site that appeared to be made by military style boots.

Officers also failed to recover a boat at Lough Eyes, with no record of fingerprint inquiries, and also failed to make inquiries about an anonymous letter that alleged the involvement of several UDR members, said the ombudsman.

She said the senior investigating officer displayed a latent investigative bias over his insistence that allegations about potential UDR involvement was part of a “smear campaign”.

“Investigative failings were central to the family’s complaint and my investigation has found that there were a number of significant failings,” said Mrs Anderson.

The report found no intelligence that could have prevented Mr Kelly’s murder, but the ombudsman said there was intelligence which included significant information linking UDR members and other individuals to the abduction and murder.

As early as July 28, 1974, intelligence provided to RUC Special Branch indicated Mr Kelly had an argument with a UDR patrol a number of days before his abduction.

In early August 1975, more than a year after the murder, intelligence named two UDR members as having carried out the murder. Both members had been interviewed as witnesses early in the RUC investigation.

Another piece of intelligence indicated that other relevant UDR members were also part of a Loyalist Defence Volunteers (LDV) paramilitary unit.

In September 1975, further intelligence named individuals as being responsible for Mr Kelly’s murder and identified a person who had stolen a 56lb weight from an identified location.

The weight was attached to Mr Kelly’s body when it was found in the lake.

The ombudsman said records indicate that some of this intelligence was shared with the local division commander who had responsibility for oversight of the murder investigation and that some was shared with CID. However, there is no record of which CID officers received it.

She said said there was no evidence that any of the intelligence was ever received by the murder investigation team.

The ombudsman said the senior investigating officer had consistently stated that he did not receive intelligence at any point linking UDR members and other individuals to Mr Kelly’s abduction and murder and that, had he been supplied with relevant intelligence, he would have made arrests.

Mrs Anderson said she accepted that none of the intelligence gathered by RUC Special Branch was disseminated to him.

The ombudsman’s investigation also established that RUC Special Branch and the ‘L’ division commander were aware of significant intelligence from 1975 reports that a UVF unit was active in the Fermanagh area at the time of Mr Kelly’s murder.

A number of this UVF unit’s members were either directly, or indirectly, linked to Mr Kelly’s murder and other terrorist attacks. The intelligence indicated that the UVF unit was assisted in their activities by a number of identified RUC and UDR members.

However, there is no evidence that any action was taken by the division commander to act on the intelligence which, the ombudsman’s investigation established, was not shared with the murder investigation team.

The Kelly family alleged that an RUC failure to investigate a number of suspects because they were members of the UDR would amount to “collusion”.

The ombudsman said the withholding of intelligence and the failure to act on it impacted upon the effectiveness of the murder investigation and were indicative of ”collusive behaviour”.

“I am of the view that the deliberate withholding of intelligence and other information from the murder investigation team and the divisional commander was indicative of collusive behaviour,” she said.

“This removed the possibility of further lines of inquiry being developed and progressed, which may have led to the arrest and prosecution of offenders.

“The non-dissemination of intelligence and the RUC Special Branch restrictions placed on the sharing of intelligence with the 1974 RUC investigation team resulted in the senior investigating officer not being provided with relevant information. It is my view that this information could have changed the direction of the investigation and opened new lines of inquiry.

“My investigation has established a failure to address the implications of other intelligence linking RUC and UDR members to a UVF unit, based in County Fermanagh. I am of the view that this was indicative of deliberately ‘turning a blind eye’ which constituted ‘collusive behaviour’ on the part of RUC Special Branch and the ‘L’ Division Commander who were accountable for these decisions.”

She added: “I am of the view that the family’s complaints about investigative failings are legitimate and justified in a number of respects.”

Mr Kelly’s widow Teresa and sons Patsy, Barry and Fearghal met the Police Ombudsman in Belfast on Wednesday morning to receive the findings.

Afterwards, Patsy Kelly welcomed the report.

“Today is highly emotional for members of our family – a campaign of 50 years searching for truth and today we are vindicated in terms of the failings of police investigations,” he said.

“We realise that today is a step forward in the overall campaign for truth and the next step in the process should be a fresh inquest that is granted immediately.”