Fatal shooting of three IRA men by SAS soldiers in Co Tyrone in 1991 ‘reasonable’, coroner rules

The use of lethal force by British Special Air Service (SAS) soldiers in an ambush which killed three IRA men in Co Tyrone in 1991 was justified, a coroner has ruled.

Delivering his provisional findings in the Coagh inquest, coroner Mr Justice Michael Humphreys said he was satisfied that the use of force was “reasonable” as the soldiers had an honest belief it was necessary in order to prevent loss of life.

However, the coroner also concluded that the operation was not planned in a manner which minimised to the greatest extent possible the need for recourse to lethal force.

The inquest into the deaths of Lawrence McNally (38), Peter Ryan (37) and Tony Doris (21) in Coagh on June 3rd, 1991 opened in 2022. The three men were intercepted as they travelled in a stolen car through Coagh by the SAS soldiers, who suspected they intended to murder a member of the security forces.

All three were shot dead in a hail of gunfire and the inquest was told that up to 150 rounds were fired.

Delivering his verdict in the legacy case, Mr Justice Humphreys said Mr McNally died as a result of gunshot wounds to the head and heart, Mr Doris as a result of wounds to the head and Mr Ryan as a result of a wound to the chest. He ruled that Mr McNally and Mr Ryan were shot by Soldier G, while Mr Doris was shot and killed by Soldier B.

The coroner said the three men were members of the East Tyrone brigade of IRA and were on “active service” when they were shot. He said the background to the case was a “surge of activity” in the area by the East Tyrone IRA.

Setting out the events, Mr Justice Humphreys said the security forces had received intelligence that the East Tyrone IRA intended to murder a former member of the UDR at a public car park in the village.

He said a specialist military unit was tasked to mount a “hard arrest” operation, which included a “reaction group” to effect the arrests and a “cover group” hidden in a modified flatbed truck to provide protection.

The coroner said that when the stolen car came to a halt at the car park entrance, the rear passenger door opened and a man wearing a balaclava armed with a rifle started to get out, pointing the weapon in the direction of Soldier L. After an order was given, the side of the the lorry was lowered and shots were fired.

The man with the rifle fell back into the car, which travelled on and crashed into another car around 30 metres away. Several further shots were then fired.

Mr Justice Humphreys was highly critical of actions by soldiers to destroy a video of the events from a surveillance location.

“If this had been available, it would have rendered the task of the inquest on many of the issues straightforward,” he said. “It would also, of course, have been of central importance to the RUC, whose role it was to assess whether any crime had been committed by the soldiers.”

He said the soldiers who gave evidence to the inquest about the destruction of the video had “demonstrated a clear and unequivocal willingness to subvert the rule of law” and that the response of senior officers in the British army “has been to excuse, justify and support such reprehensible conduct” rather than condemn it.

Turning to the original RUC investigation, Mr Justice Humphreys said police had failed to challenge accounts given by soldiers, to interview the soldiers promptly after the shootings and to investigate the planning of the operation at all. He said the RUC investigation was “woefully inadequate”.

He concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that no IRA member had discharged his weapon.

He added: “In each case, the use of lethal force was justified as the soldiers had an honest belief that it was necessary in order to prevent loss of life.

“The use of force by the soldiers was, in the circumstances they believed them to be, reasonable.

“The operation was not planned and controlled in such a way as to minimise to the greatest extent possible the need for recourse to lethal force.”

Speaking outside court, solicitor Pádraig Ó Muirigh, who acts for the Ryan and Doris families, said his clients were disappointed at the finding that the force used was justified but that they welcomed criticism of the army operation. - PA