🔗 Share this article

January 30th, 1972 is remembered as among the most deadly – and significant – occasions throughout three decades of conflict in the region.

Within the community of the incident – the images of Bloody Sunday are painted on the buildings and seared in collective memory.

A protest demonstration was conducted on a cold but bright afternoon in the city.

The protest was opposing the practice of internment – imprisoning people without due process – which had been established after multiple years of violence.

Troops from the elite army unit fatally wounded 13 people in the district – which was, and still is, a overwhelmingly nationalist community.

A specific visual became especially prominent.

Pictures showed a religious figure, Father Daly, displaying a bloodied fabric in his effort to defend a group moving a youth, the injured teenager, who had been killed.

Media personnel captured considerable film on the day.

Documented accounts features Fr Daly informing a reporter that troops "just seemed to discharge weapons randomly" and he was "completely sure" that there was no reason for the shooting.

This account of what happened was rejected by the first inquiry.

The Widgery Tribunal found the military had been attacked first.

In the resolution efforts, the administration commissioned another inquiry, following pressure by bereaved relatives, who said Widgery had been a inadequate investigation.

In 2010, the report by the investigation said that on balance, the paratroopers had fired first and that not one of the casualties had been armed.

The contemporary government leader, the leader, expressed regret in the Parliament – declaring killings were "improper and unacceptable."

The police commenced examine the matter.

An ex-soldier, identified as the defendant, was charged for homicide.

He was charged over the fatalities of the first individual, in his twenties, and twenty-six-year-old the second individual.

The accused was additionally charged of seeking to harm Patrick O'Donnell, Joseph Friel, further individuals, Michael Quinn, and an unknown person.

Exists a court ruling protecting the veteran's anonymity, which his lawyers have argued is essential because he is at danger.

He testified the examination that he had only fired at individuals who were armed.

That claim was rejected in the final report.

Information from the investigation could not be used directly as proof in the court case.

In court, the accused was screened from view with a privacy screen.

He addressed the court for the first time in the proceedings at a session in that month, to reply "not guilty" when the allegations were put to him.

Family members of those who were killed on the incident journeyed from the city to the judicial building daily of the trial.

One relative, whose relative was killed, said they were aware that listening to the proceedings would be painful.

"I can see the events in my mind's eye," the relative said, as we examined the primary sites referenced in the trial – from the street, where the victim was fatally wounded, to the adjacent Glenfada Park, where one victim and the second person were fatally wounded.

"It even takes me back to where I was that day.

"I helped to carry my brother and lay him in the ambulance.

"I went through every moment during the evidence.

"Notwithstanding having to go through everything – it's still valuable for me."