🔗 Share this article

Sunday 30 January 1972 stands as arguably the most fatal – and significant – dates throughout multiple decades of conflict in the region.

Throughout the area of the incident – the images of that fateful day are displayed on the structures and etched in public consciousness.

A civil rights march was organized on a wintry, sunny day in the city.

The protest was a protest against the system of imprisonment without charges – detaining individuals without trial – which had been put in place after an extended period of conflict.

Military personnel from the elite army unit fatally wounded thirteen individuals in the district – which was, and remains, a predominantly nationalist population.

A particular photograph became notably iconic.

Images showed a clergyman, Father Daly, displaying a blood-stained fabric in his effort to shield a crowd transporting a young man, the injured teenager, who had been mortally injured.

Journalists documented considerable film on the day.

Historical records includes Fr Daly telling a reporter that troops "gave the impression they would shoot indiscriminately" and he was "totally convinced" that there was no reason for the shooting.

This account of events was disputed by the initial investigation.

The Widgery Tribunal concluded the Army had been fired upon initially.

Throughout the peace process, the ruling party set up a new investigation, following pressure by family members, who said the initial inquiry had been a inadequate investigation.

That year, the conclusion by the inquiry said that generally, the paratroopers had discharged weapons initially and that not one of the casualties had posed any threat.

The then Prime Minister, the Prime Minister, issued an apology in the House of Commons – saying killings were "without justification and unacceptable."

Law enforcement started to examine the matter.

A military veteran, identified as Soldier F, was charged for murder.

Accusations were made regarding the killings of one victim, twenty-two, and twenty-six-year-old the second individual.

Soldier F was additionally charged of attempting to murder several people, additional persons, further individuals, an additional individual, and an unidentified individual.

Exists a judicial decision protecting the defendant's privacy, which his attorneys have claimed is necessary because he is at threat.

He stated to the Saville Inquiry that he had only fired at individuals who were armed.

This assertion was dismissed in the official findings.

Information from the examination could not be used immediately as testimony in the court case.

In the dock, the defendant was screened from view using a protective barrier.

He addressed the court for the opening instance in the hearing at a proceeding in that month, to respond "innocent" when the accusations were presented.

Kin of the victims on that day made the trip from the city to the judicial building each day of the proceedings.

A family member, whose relative was died, said they were aware that hearing the proceedings would be emotional.

"I remember all details in my mind's eye," John said, as we walked around the key areas referenced in the case – from the location, where the victim was fatally wounded, to the adjacent the courtyard, where the individual and William McKinney were fatally wounded.

"It reminds me to where I was that day.

"I helped to carry Michael and put him in the medical transport.

"I went through each detail during the testimony.

"Notwithstanding enduring the process – it's still meaningful for me."