The Bloody Sunday inquiry team said yesterday it had been told by its counsel that there were "stark differences" in accounts given by British army and civilian witnesses into the killing of 13 unarmed men by paratroopers in 1972.
The inquiry counsel, Mr Christopher Clarke QC, has told the inquiry team, chaired by Lord Saville of Newdigate, that while it was too early to draw firm conclusions, it was clear the circumstances of the shootings were being disputed.
A tribunal spokesman said: "Detailed investigation of the existing material shows a large body of civilian evidence which says that the army fired live bullets without justification in circumstances where they were subject to no threat or provocation which would justify such action and without themselves having been fired upon and that none of the dead or wounded were carrying or firing weapons . . .
"On the other hand, evidence from soldiers was that shortly after entering the Bogside they came under substantial fire from several directions and in various forms, and that each of the live shots fired by them was fired at a person who was, or was believed to be, either a gunman or a nail or acid bomber."
Mr Clarke told the tribunal they would have to consider how "these diametrically opposed views" could be tested. "The counsel's report sets out five sectors which would correspond broadly to the geographical and chronological sequence of events. "It describes in detail how the different bodies of evidence do not tally. For example, in the Glenfada Park area, the evidence of the soldiers accounts for only six hits, although there would appear to be nine dead and wounded in this area," the spokesman said.