Murder victim's brother welcomes apology personally delivered by police chief
The 25-year-old died after being shot while in a taxi in the area of Springfield Park on his way home.
Earlier that evening, UDA terrorists are believed to have cut a hole in a peace line fence to access the area which was reported to police.
Chief Constable Jon Boutcher delivered an apology to Mr Thompson in hospital in Belfast on Tuesday which acknowledges failures by police.
It describes Paul Thompson's murder as 'tragic and senseless', and pays tribute to his brother and mother Margaret, who has since died, for 'great courage and resilience in their journey for the truth about his murder'.
Paul Thompson was murdered aged 25 in 1994 (Committee on the Administration of Justice/PA)
The apology says the murder has not been the subject of a full and effective investigation in accordance with article two of the European Convention on Human Rights, and accepts a conclusion by the former Historical Enquiries Team that police could have taken steps to provide patrolling in the area after suspicious activity was reported.
'That dedicated action may have prevented Paul's murder,' the apology states.
It also acknowledges the original police investigation did not identify or pursue all lines of inquiry and significant disclosure delays at the inquest.
'The police service apologises unreservedly to Eugene for the above failings on the part of policing which impacted adversely both on the delivery of justice for Paul and on his family's quest for the truth,' it said.
'We are committed to improving how we help families and communities impacted by the troubles by being more open, transparent and victim-focused, and by disclosing as much information as we possibly can.
'The police service believes that further information about Paul's murder can safely be released to Eugene and hopes that the pending Supreme Court judgment will allow for this to happen.'
The UK government took a legal effort to the Supreme Court to prevent coroner Louisa Fee from disclosing a summary, or gist, of the evidence in a sensitive security force file following an inquest into Mr Thompson's death. A ruling has not yet been made.
Mr Thompson welcomed the apology from Mr Boutcher, and said he hopes to see the judgment from the Supreme Court soon.
Eugene Thompson received an apology over the handling of the murder of his brother from PSNI Chief Constable Jon Boutcher (PA)
'I thanked Jon Boutcher for coming himself and for acting quickly in delivering the apology from the PSNI after we had asked for it,' he said.
'That's different to the British Supreme Court, who also know my situation, and I had hoped they would have made their judgment by now, but there is no sign of it.
'The apology makes clear the RUC didn't investigate and arrest suspects when they could have and that they could have done things that could have prevented Paul's murder.'
Daniel Holder, director of the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ), said Mr Thompson and his mother 'long fought for justice and truth in relation to Paul's murder'.
He added: 'The High Court and Court of Appeal ruled over a year ago that Eugene was entitled to see the information in the coroner's 'gist'.
'The Secretary of State appealed the Supreme Court hearing was back at the beginning of June and Eugene is still awaiting the ruling.
'It's welcome that the PSNI chief constable has quickly delivered this apology in relation to the RUC and PSNI failings.'
A PSNI spokesperson said: 'The Chief Constable, Jon Boutcher, held a private meeting with Mr Eugene Thompson, the brother of Liam Paul Thompson, during which he provided a statement of apology on behalf of the Police Service of Northern Ireland for failings identified on the part of the RUC and PSNI.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
9 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Migrant hotel protests spread across the country with more planned today as cops clamp down on weekend of stand-offs
Police have arrested 18 people and charged seven HOTEL RAGE Migrant hotel protests spread across the country with more planned today as cops clamp down on weekend of stand-offs Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) MIGRANT hotel protests have spread across the country as furious citizens take to the streets to challenge illegal immigration. Yesterday protests were held across the country with demonstrations outside migrant hotels held in Norwich, Leeds, Southampton and Nottinghamshire. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Brits are expressing rising anger with the Government's use of migrant hotels Credit: PA Further demonstrations are planned today in Epping, Wolverhampton and Cheshire as anger over the Government's continued use of migrant hotels rises. The protests have so far remained peaceful but some minor confrontations with counter protestors were seen. A group of counter protesters wearing masks reportedly broke away from the main group at the Nottinghamshire demonstration and walked into the middle of the crowd. Some were said to be carrying 'Stand Up to Racism' placards and were escorted away by police. Further demonstrations are planned today in Epping, Wolverhampton and Cheshire as public anger over the Government's use of migrant hotels rises. Police have so far arrested 18 people and charged seven in connection with the continuous protests in Epping. The migrant hotel demonstrations began after an asylum seeker was charged with sexual assault. The man is alleged to have attempted to kiss a 14-year-old girl. Protests have spread across the country with demonstrations held earlier in the week outside the four-star Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf. According to the latest Home Office data 32,000 asylum seekers are being housed in around 210 hotels across the country. A record 24,000 migrants have crossed the Channel so far in 2025.
The Herald Scotland
13 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Supreme Court asked to issue guidance to Scottish judges
Speaking to The Herald, criminal defence advocate Mr Lenehan said new guidance from the Supreme Court would be "welcomed". He said: 'Clear guidance from the Supreme Court would be welcomed by practitioners. "Guidance which respects the intelligence of juries to assess the value of evidence within the confines of each case, and provides an accessible instruction to judges and practitioners alike to ensure the ideal balance is found between the rights of the accused and respect for the privacy and dignity of vulnerable complainers when admitting sensitive evidence.' READ MORE: Earlier this month fellow advocate Thomas Leonard Ross KC raised his concerns with The Herald that he believed some men accused of sexual offences were not getting a fair trial because of how courts were understanding rules relating to the admissibility of evidence in sexual offence trials. He told The Herald that victims had told lies about matters relating to a case yet the defence had been stopped from putting that situation to the jury. "How can it be said that someone has had a fair trial when it's been proved that the complainer lied about something important in the course of the inquiry and that was not allowed to be introduced as evidence?" he said. "There are serious concerns that people are not getting a fair trial when they are not being given the opportunity to provide evidence which might support their innocence". Tony Lenehan KC, vice dean of the Faculty of Advocates (Image: Contributor) The debate revolves around what evidence is allowed to be heard in open court before a jury. Known as "rape shield" laws, specific provisions to regulate the use of sexual history evidence were first introduced in Scotland by the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1985 and were designed primarily to protect rape complainers' privacy and dignity. The provisions were later repeated in sections 274 and 275 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. In response to concerns about their operation, the provisions in the 1995 Act were replaced by new sections 274 and 275 in 2002. Sections 274 and 275 of the 1995 Act were intended to protect complainers in sexual offence trials from inappropriate questioning about their sexual history and wider character and lifestyle when giving evidence in court. Rape shield laws were designed to protect rape victims' privacy and dignity (Image: PA) In particular, they were intended to discourage the use of evidence seen as of limited relevance, where the primary purpose of the evidence is to undermine the credibility of the complainer or divert attention from the issues that require to be determined at trial. Defence lawyers can make an application to the court for certain evidence regarded as inadmissible to be heard. But to succeed they must demonstrate when they make the application that not just that the evidence is relevant, but that its relevance is so great that it outweighs the intrusion it represents into the privacy and dignity of the affected complainer. "That's the balancing exercise which goes awry sometimes, in the view of many lawyers," said Mr Lenehan. Mr Ross had said in some cases the way rules allowing only evidence that is "relevant" to the charge to be heard have been too narrowly interpreted meaning evidence that a jury may have seen as significant was not allowed to be heard by them. Thomas Leonard Ross KC raised concerns over the operation of rape shield laws (Image: PA) Mr Lenehan said: "There is absolutely no question that a robust rape shield is there just seems to be fairly broad views that there were risks attached to the ever narrowing of rules around the admissibility of evidence. "Sometimes I find it hard to explain to an accused person who is asking me 'I don't understand why I can't tell the jury that.'" Mr Lenehan said his concerns did not go as far as those expressed by Mr Ross arguing that the problematic cases were "outliers'. "I don't think you can say there is a whole scale difficulty. That is not the view that I've got," he said. "But I am aware that there is widespread concern. What is at the core of my concern is that we undervalue jurors' intelligence when we apply these increasing limits to what they can and what they can't know. "Part of the issue just now is that we don't accord enough respect to the intellect of juries. I worry about that and I worry that there have been decisions that seemed to me to remove from the jury things that the jury would have found relevant to their considerations." Rape Crisis Scotland chief executive Sandy Brindley said: 'Robust implementation of the current protection for complainers in relation to defence using their sexual history or character is essential. "This evidence is highly prejudicial, often designed to appeal to any prejudice jury members might have around women's behaviour. "Polling published earlier this month found 47% of Scottish adults believe in at least one rape myth – this could be the idea that people cannot be raped by someone they are in a relationship with, or that rape always involves violence. "The prospect of their sexual history or character being introduced in court is extremely distressing and often prevents women from feeling able to report what has happened to them to the police. 'Seeking justice for rape shouldn't mean having to be subjected to irrelevant and distressing questioning. "Numerous cases of sexual violence have highlighted the need for the senior judges to act. Cases like Macdonald in 2020, where during cross-examination a young woman was asked 12 different questions about showering with her female friend the night of the incident, 11 questions on what she was wearing immediately prior to and during the incident, and repeated reference to the type of underwear she was wearing. It is unacceptable that women are being treated like this. 'The conviction rate in rape cases with one complainer in Scotland is 24%, compared to an overall crime conviction rate of 86%. There are absolutely miscarriages of justice happening in rape cases – however, the issue here is not men being wrongly convicted. It is women routinely being denied justice, and rapists regularly walking free.' A spokesman for the Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service said it did not want to comment on Mr Lenehan's remarks. A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: 'Everyone has the right to a fair trial and to appeal against a conviction or sentence. There are well-established rules on what evidence can be led in sexual offences trials, and clear routes to challenge how these are applied.'
Scottish Sun
18 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Prison reopens unit where Manchester Arena terror plotter Hashem Abedi stabbed & scalded three guards
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) A PRISON has reopened a unit where Manchester Arena terror plotter Hashem Abedi stabbed and scalded three guards. Extremists held in HMP Frankland's separation centre will in future face a tougher regime and be barred from using the kitchen, sources say. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Manchester Arena terror plotter Hashem Abedi stabbed and scalded three guards Credit: PA 2 Extremists held in HMP Frankland's separation centre will in future face a tougher regime Credit: PA:Press Association Abedi, 28 — serving 55 years for helping brother Salman plan the 2017 bomb attack which killed 22 — used boiled butter and two 12in knives made from baking trays to attack the officers. All three suffered 'life-threatening' injuries on May 12 and are unlikely to return to work, it is understood. The Co Durham jail horror saw ministers order a review into separation centres. A source said of the 'prison within a prison' unit: 'Huge mistakes were made before Abedi's attack and hard lessons learned. "In future, the regime will be tougher and there will be fewer inmates.' Of the injured staff, he said: 'All know they could have died. "None of the three look like they will return.' The Prison Service confirmed Frankland's separation centre was 'fully staffed and stopping the most dangerous offenders from radicalising others'.
