Accused wanted to 'put frighteners' on policeman

Chris Donegan • Published 18 Mar 2011 09:30

Two alleged republican terrorists accused of attempting to murder a student police officer during a shooting incident in Garrison have claimed they were only trying to scare him out of the nationalist village.

Kevin Barry Nolan and Gerard James McManus have also claimed they were entrapped by a police agent.

They were detained during an undercover police operation and have been in custody, awaiting trial, since being arrested shortly after the shooting in November 2009.

Nolan, who is 34 and from Main Street, Blacklion, and 27-year-old McManus, from Fernhill, Letterkenny, are charged with attempting to murder the student police officer and having a gun with intent to endanger life.

McManus is further charged with using the gun to resist arrest.

They appeared at Strabane Court on Tuesday amid tight security. Around half a dozen supporters shouted to the pair as they arrived in a prison van. The supporters later ignored protocol by refusing to stand when District Judge Bernadette Kelly entered the courtroom for the Preliminary Investigation to establish if there was enough evidence against the Nolan and McManus to return them for trial.

A lawyer for the PPS (Public Prosecution Service) outlined the case against them.

She said that around 8pm on November 21, 2009, Nolan and McManus were seen in a Vauxhall Astra approaching the student police officer's home at 12A Brollagh Road, Garrison. McManus got out of the car, put on a Balaclava and went up to the front door. He knocked it once or twice. Nolan remained in the front passenger seat of the car.

The prosecutor said that as the police moved in, McManus escaped, running down the side of the house and firing a shot. Nolan was apprehended in the Astra, sitting on a magazine for a Glock pistol. The magazine was loaded with 16 rounds of ammunition.

She described how McManus was apprehended 12 hours later, at 8am the following day, in a garden shed. A Balaclava and gloves were found in the shed but the gun was not recovered.

The court heard that both men were interviewed extensively by police and admitted going to the scene in the Astra. McManus said he went up to the front of the house with the intention of firing shots in the air to frighten the student police officer. He said he wanted the student police officer to get out of Garrison as it was a nationalist village. He admitted firing the gun when police were pursuing him but said he did not fire at them.

The prosecutor said that during one of 10 interviews McManus read a statement in which he admitted going to the home of the student police officer to "order him out of the area."

McManus stated: "There was no way I was going to shoot him.

"I was going to fire a couple of shots in the air" and tell him "you f--king Brit you ...... get out of the area," he added.

Asked why he was going to fire shots in the air, McManus replied: "To scare him, wanted to terrify him like."

He said that when he went to the front of the house the police drove up and crashed into the Astra. They then "started firing" and he ran around the house as he was afraid they were going to shoot him.

In his statement he went on to say he fired a shot. He said he fell back and his arm was outstretched to his left "and the gun accidentally went off".

The prosecutor said that when McManus was asked if he had been forced or threatened into going to the house with the gun or if he had acted under duress or had a loved one or family member threatened, he made no comment.

She submitted that he voluntarily became involved in this activity.

The court was told that Nolan's role was to give McManus directions.

Nolan made seven statements during which he said it was their intention to scare the student police officer with the possible use of the firearm.

He stated: "As far as I was concerned, no harm was going to be caused."

He said the gun was to "put the frighteners on him".

Asked what the firelighters found in the front of the Astra were for, he replied: "I assume to burn the vehicle out."

He added that they were going back to the car park to burn the vehicle there.

The prosecutor said the only issue was what Nolan and Maguire's intention was in going to the student police officer's house with the gun.

She submitted their admissions alone were more than enough to establish a prima facie case against them and return them for trial.

However, Nolan's defence barrister, Mr. Mark Reel, instructed by Mr. Declan Marlow of Murphy and McManus, submitted there had been an abuse of the legal process by way of entrapment. He said the prosecution had not disclosed any material on the issue.

The District Judge said she was "absolutely astonished" that having adjourned the hearing last October, five months later the issue of disclosure had not been dealt with.

The prosecutor said the PPS told the defence last December there was no entrapment.

Mr. Reel said the prosecution had been provided with the name of the person the defence said was responsible for the entrapment.

The prosecutor argued that the defence had to give details, not only about the person but the circumstances of the entrapment.

She submitted that during McManus's 10 interviews there was no suggestion of entrapment.

"There is no evidence of entrapment," she stated. "There's a name given but no address, or what this person is meant to have done."

McManus's defence solicitor, Mr. Peter Corrigan, said the prosecution had been told the man's name and address and that he had "coerced, cajoled and lured the defendant", that he worked for the police, and the authorities had knowledge of, and approved, the activities of this person.

Mr. Reel referred to part of Nolan's statement in which he said a man he had known previously got in contact with him and told him there was a student police officer in Garrison. The man said he did not know the officer's name or address but asked Nolan if he would be prepared to accompany another person.

The prosecutor said Nolan told police that someone spoke to him and asked him would he do this.

She argued that entrapment was the police manipulating a situation to get someone to do something they would not otherwise do.

She wondered why the issue of entrapment was not raised during any of the police interviews.

The District Judge said some sort of investigation had to be carried out. She asked if the man's name appeared in the case documents and said that if it did the information should be provided to the defence lawyers.

Mr. Corrigan said this was a joint operation and this particular individual was working for the Gardai.

The District Judge pointed out that, unlike a Crown Court Judge, she did not have the power to have information disclosed by a third party.

Mr. Corrigan said it was their case that the PSNI's senior investigating officer in the case liaised with Gardai.

The District Judge then adjourned the case until April 11, to allow the prosecutor to review all the documents in the case, specifically for the name of this man, and then issue a statement to the defence about disclosure.

Tweet

This article appeared in Impartial Reporter 17 Mar 11

Return to the main index, get more from this section or browse our News archives.