ANALYSIS: Day one of the Newsletter’s Loughinisland series raises intriguing questions
Today marks the first of a five day series of articles being carried by the Newsletter which seeks to challenge the prevailing ‘collusion’ narrative and myths promoted by nationalist legacy activists.
Unionist Voice has been campaigning against the Loughinisland ‘collusion’ narrative since 2017 and was at the forefront of challenging the ‘No Stone Unturned’ documentary, highlighting the bogus nature of many of the allegations carried within that film and the links between the supposedly ‘independent’ film makers, nationalist lawyers and ‘journalists’ involved in making the documentary and earlier allegations.
Each day we will seek to provide a summary of the Newsletter’s coverage to our readers, and on occasions expand upon the identification of some of the personalities behind driving the false and malicious ‘collusion’ narrative for their own ends. This includes at least one prominent nationalist lawyer whose tentacles stretch into every aspect of the Loughinisland case and false allegations- made for political purposes- made against RUC officers and a High Court Judge.
In today’s coverage the lead journalist producing the series, Mark Rainey, provides an overview of some of the revelations ahead in the coming the days. These include;
- How a ‘mystery witness’ convinced the Loughinisland families there was ‘collusion’. Questions will undoubtedly surface around which online media outlet amplified the allegations of this ‘mystery witness’ and which lawyer facilitated the proliferation of the politically contrived allegations. Another key question is sure to be whether the lawyer, a journalist and a ‘mystery witness’ were all connected and all benefitted either financially and/or politically out of the ‘No Stone Unturned’ documentary. It is almost certain that some industrious person will investigate whether there is a similar thread between the stolen Police Ombudsman document which was allegedly ‘posted’ to nationalist journalist Barry McCaffray, the lawyer and the ‘mystery witness’. It does appear that, even on the basis of the first day of the series, that all roads lead back to the same place.
- How the getaway car was not destroyed in the manner presented by ‘No Stone Unturned’, but rather key parts was retained for forensic purposes. It was only a rusted shell that was disposed of, and only after all relevant investigations and forensic tests had been carried out.
- How the alleged link between the murder weapon, a VZ58 rifle, and weapons brought into South Armagh by Ulster Resistance was flimsy at best. The Ombudsman’s link between the weapon and the Ulster Resistance guns was that rifles seized in 1988 had similar serial numbers to the murder weapon used at Loughinisland. This despite the fact that the Ombudsman himself conceded that the weapons seized in 1988 had a “wide range of often non-consecutive serial numbers”.
The coverage from day one also includes a quote from Sinn Fein MLA and Loughinisland families’ spokesperson Emma Rogan from 2012. She said “Al Hutchinson’s report is now in the bin. It is a good opportunity for Mr Maguire to put the record straight. Fingers crossed. Hopefully in 2013 Mr Maguire will do what he says he’s going to do”.
This quote leaves a tantalising question hanging in advance of the second day of the Newsletter’s series. What precisely did Mr Maguire “say he was going to do” prior even to the commencement of his supposedly independent investigation?
It raises the question, which is sure to grow in prominence over the coming days, around whether there was a conspiracy between nationalist lawyers, nationalist journalists, a ‘mystery witness’ and the Police Ombudsman himself to arrive at a politically convenient outcome in the Loughinisland investigation.
You can read the Newsletter’s exclusive series by Mark Rainey @Mark_RaineyNL in the paper each day, or online at www.Newsletter.co.uk