Britain's Lord Chief Justice warned a Sunday newspaper editor in 1972 against publishing an investigative report into what happened on Bloody Sunday, the inquiry heard yesterday.
The late Lord Widgery, who at that stage had agreed to conduct an inquiry into the events, made clear to Harold Evans, then editor of the Sunday Times, that he would take a serious view of the paper publishing anything before his tribunal had concluded its work. He warned that it could constitute a contempt of the tribunal.
The present inquiry was told by its counsel, Mr Christopher Clarke QC, that two editors of the Sunday Times "Insight" feature at the time, Bruce Page and Ron Hall, were also opposed to publication of the report submitted by its journalists a week after Bloody Sunday.
They were opposed to publication whether or not it would be a contempt, because they felt the conclusions reached were not substantiated by the evidence produced by the reporters.
Mr Clarke then read part of a statement made to this inquiry by Mr Page. The statement said: "The thrust of the article they produced, as I remember it, alleged that the Parachute Regiment, under the influence of Brig Frank Kitson, had decided to plan an operation in Derry to draw the IRA into battle by attacking the NICRA march and that the shootings had, in substantial measure, been premeditated by the army.
"I, along with some other members of the editorial team, felt that the article was not substantiated by the evidence (Murray) Sayle and (Derek) Humphrey had produced." It added: "Any suggestion that the Sunday Times failed to print the Sayle and Humphrey article as a result of collusion with or undue pressure by the government or its agents is not true. The article was not printed because it was not backed up by evidence.
"The Sunday Times under Harold Evans was very strongly concerned to report events in Northern Ireland objectively and to be fair to both the Catholic and Protestant communities. Any suggestion that stories reflecting badly on the army might have been suppressed is simply false.
"A number of journalists, including John Fielding, Phillip Jacobson and Peter Pringle from the `Insight' team, were then duly sent to Derry under the direction of John Barry, the `Insight' team editor. They were resident there for a number of weeks and submitted their material to John Barry, who was the principal writer of the `Insight' team's article published in the newspaper on Sunday, April 23rd, 1972."
Mr Clarke then reviewed the unpublished article, pointing out its concluding comment: "We have no choice but to conclude that this was a Parachute Regiment special operation which went disastrously wrong."
Counsel also read parts of the article published by the Sunday Times on April 23rd, 1972. Its conclusions, as summarised, were that:
"1. The operation was caused by British ministers in knowledge of the risks of civilian casualties.
"2. Militarily, it went wrong in plan and operation.
"3. The IRA did fire.
"4. The paratroopers' response was out of proportion. It needs to be remembered that, of the 100-odd involved, the vast majority did not fire, let alone kill anyone. Nevertheless, there are cases where soldiers shot at obviously unarmed civilians.
"5. The Widgery findings are at points at variance with the evidence given. The events of Bloody Sunday are worth examining, not because people died tragically but because the day represented the culmination and discrediting of a policy of military response, a policy which is now once more being urged on the government."