Pursuing justice
Sir: May I add a brief coda to my article of last week on the case for a retrial of the two Scots Guardsmen, Fisher and Wright ( Scots free', 23 May)? I stated then that in his summing-up the trial judge accepted the evidence of three local Irish residents who said that the patrol that apprehended McBride had searched hint thoroughly in preference to that of the Guardsmen who denied that any search had taken place. If, for the sake of argument, a thorough search did take place, then it follows that McBride was found to be unarmed. And if that was so, then certain questions arise Which the judge made no attempt to answer. Why, if McBride was unarmed, did he suddenly run away? Why did Sergeant Swift, the patrol leader, order the Guards- men to grab him? And thirdly, if McBride had nothing to hide, why did he not stop when Fisher and Wright told him that they would open fire if he didn't?
In my submission, the only reason that Fisher and Wright acted as they did was because they were convinced from what they saw that McBride was carrying a cof- fee-jar bomb and might use it. Army rules about engagement were extremely strict and dinned into the patrols every day; and for Fisher and Wright to have opened fire on McBride, knowing him to be unarmed, is to my mind beyond the bounds of credibility.
Ludovic Kennedy
Marlborough, Wiltshire
Previous page
