Bloody Sunday:: Truths Lies and the Saville Inquiry

by Douglas Murray

Douglas Murray followed the Saville Inquiry daily, almost from the beginning, hoping to find a story. Instead, he found hundreds. In this book he tells these stories—the stories of the individuals involved in the terrible events of that defining day, Bloody Sunday.This book is not only about a terrible event and it is not just about a process of justice. It is about the efforts of a group of people to arrive at truth and a country's effort—three decades on—at a painful and perhaps incomplete reconciliation.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Ireland, Politics, Audiobook, Ebooks, Cultural

320 pages, Paperback

First published November 3, 2011

About the author

Douglas Kear Murray is a British neoconservative writer and commentator. He was the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion from 2007 until 2011, and is currently an associate director of the Henry Jackson Society.

Murray appears regularly in the British broadcast media, commentating on issues from a conservative standpoint, and he is often critical of Islamic fundamentalism. He writes for a number of publications, including Standpoint, the Wall Street Journal and The Spectator.

Reviews

[Darjeeling · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow. I'm gonna go read all his other books.

This must have been a monumental task for the author, yet he has succeeded in writing a book that is hard to stop reading. Having said that, It pulls no punches, and is not for the faint hearted. One must crawl through a great deal of blood and lies in order to get to the truth, and I actually feel rather proud to be British that such a momentous attempt to achieve truth and justice in difficult circumstances was completed. If only something similar could be arranged for Henry Kissinger. Apparently Obama felt he should be given an award instead.

[Colin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent account of the enquiry as well as a retelling - through the mists of time - of the events of that day. I have to respect Douglas Murray's work on this. He's really put in the effort to get to grips with the material and told the story in a way that's gripping and has a few intersting theories up its sleeve.

[Oliver Everard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good and detailed account of the saville inquiry, into bloody Sunday. It obviously does mention Irish and British history, however only to give a background for the events of Bloody Sunday. If you are looking for a broader more detailed account of the events of Northern Ireland I suggest looking elsewhere.

It does find success in giving a detailed account into the events of Bloody Sunday, the lies told at the saville enquiry and the effects of bloody Sunday on the families of the innocent killed and the wider Northern Irish community.

It is at times gruesome, but not over the top and always factual. (Or as close to factual as you can get with the events on Bloody Sunday.) The difficulty in getting the objective truth is displayed by Murray in giving an example of the differing accounts told to the saville enquiry by civilians about a victims body part. I believe over 20 differing accounts were given in evidence.

I am surprised to see a couple of reviews suggesting Murray is bias, perphaps his enquiry into whether McGuinness was an MI6 informant - or a fairly offensive sentence regarding Irish culture as being "addicted to violence" - citing an IRA fighter volunteering to fight for the Nazis in WW2. Whilst volunteering for the Nazi war machine should attract criticism, shoe horning it into a book about the British Army murdering it's own civilians seems circumspect at best. Murray remains neutral in recounting the findings of the savile enquiry and successfully separates his own views from that of the savile enquiry.

The parties whom come off the worst, is the British Army and Soldiers G and F. Which are accused of mass murder, both in the savile report and by Murray. All official victims in the events of bloody Sunday were found to be innocent.

[Eamonn · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fair and detailed account of bloody sunday. The author is an english neo conservative, which put me on the defensive when reading but he is equally damning of pretty much everyone involved, with the exception of the innocent marchers, including those killed by the army.

[Richard K · Rating 5 out of 5]

Worth 6 stars. Unbelievably eviscerating of the key players on all sides

[Nicholas Whyte · Rating 4 out of 5]

https://nwhyte.livejournal.com/3257365.html

Douglas Murray is a right-wing journalist, and his book partly reflects that perspective; it's a series of snapshots of individuals who gave evidence (or should have) to the Saville enquiry. This is not always successful. The chapters on Edward Heath, Bernadette McAliskey and Martin McGuinness don't really tell us much about them; each stonewalled the enquiry in different ways, and it's quite difficult to tell a story about people not talking. The chapter on the British intelligence source codenamed "Infliction" gets way too mesmerised by the supposed glamour of intelligence-gathering. His chapter on the IRA is mainly gossip which confuses the Officials and Provisionals, though there is one amusing detail, that a leading Official IRA member, who Saville would have liked to hear from, was actually selling cigarette lighters at a stall outside the Guildhall until he died in 2003.

But there are three very good chapters here, and they are all about the soldiers who carried out the shooting on Bloody Sunday. One tantalising suggestion is that Soldier G, who is known to be now dead and was Soldier F's partner in murder on the day, ended up as one of the mercenaries killed with Costas Georgiou, "Colonel Callan", in Angola in 1976. Murray hints that Soldier G may actually have been Georgiou himself, though I think it's a bit too good to be true.

There is a brutal chapter on Colonel Derek Wilford, whose blind defence of his men in the teeth of the evidence is remarkable. Some extracts are given from Wilford's ill-advised media interviews, including this jewel of an exchange with Jim Naughtie on the Today Programme (back in 1999 when it was still worth listening to):

DW: I have to ask: what about Bloody Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and every day of the week? What about Bloody Omagh, what about Bloody Warrenpoint, Enniskillen, Hyde Park, Bloody Aldershot and Brighton? Bloody everything the IRA ever touch?
JN: Colonel Wilford, I think you would find it hard to argue that the IRA had had a good press in Britain.

[...]
[Michael McKinney, whose brother was killed on Bloody Sunday, is brought into the conversation]

DW: He may represent his dead brother and a very, very tragic situation it is, but I do not accept that he merely represents him. He represents the Republican organisation and we are naive to the point of idiocy to believe otherwise.
JN: Well, can I, Colonel Wilford, I must interrupt you there because Mr McKinney, as you know, is sitting across from me…
DW: No, I didn’t know he was sitting across from you.
JN: Well, he is, I did say he was in the studio. He was shaking his head rather vigorously and I must ask him just on this question. Colonel Wilford has said that you represent a particular strain of Republicanism. Now I just want to put that to you because you’re still here.
MM: Well, that’s totally untrue. I’ve been involved in the Bloody Sunday issue, the Bloody Sunday campaign these past seven years. I’m one of the founder members of that, myself and a number of other relatives are involved in that and we have no links with any Republican organisation at all.
JN: Right. Colonel Wilford, I mean, that’s been said, do you accept it?
DW: No, of course I don’t accept it.
JN: Why not?
DW: Well, because they will all say that, won’t they.

But Murray's book begins and ends with two brutal chapters on Soldier F, who together with the late Soldier G killed between five and seven of those who died on Bloody Sunday. The first chapter graphically describes F's murder of Bernard McGuigan, the last person to be killed on Bloody Sunday, and reflects on how memories of such a horrific event can cheat (there is a very gruesome detail involving a detached body part which I won't describe further). In the second last chapter, Murray looks at how Soldier F's story that he had fired only at rioters who were attacking him fell apart within hours of Bloody Sunday, and recounts how the inquiry got through his defences and forced him to admit at least some responsibility. Murray doesn't quote it, but this is the crucial dialogue:

Q. Before your evidence concludes, I think I ought to summarise for you the accusations and allegations that have been raised and which the Tribunal will have to consider and determine.
The allegations are, firstly, that you killed up to four people, possibly even more. Firstly Michael Kelly, and we know, do we not, that you killed him because of the forensic evidence that a bullet from your gun was found in his body?
A. That is correct.
Q. Secondly, you have accepted, in answering questions from Mr Mansfield behind me, that you shot Barry McGuigan, whose photograph, in a pool of blood, you have seen; do you remember that?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you also accept that you shot Patrick Doherty on whose behalf you were asked questions this afternoon by Ms McDermott?
A. Yes.
Q. As I have put to you, there is evidence that might lead to the conclusion that you shot William McKinney in Glenfada Park; do you follow?
A. Yes.
Q. What is alleged in relation to each of those four people is that you shot them without justification, that is to say, that you murdered them; do you follow?
A. I follow, it is not correct, but I follow, yes.
Q. And you say that it is not correct, because?
A. Because, as I refer to my statements, the people I shot were either petrol bombers or a person who had a weapon.
Q. I also put to you that you may have wounded Joe Mahon, the boy whose body is on the ground behind William McKinney's in Glenfada Park. The suggestion is also that you may have wounded the two others who were wounded below the Rossville Flats; do you follow?
A. Yes.
Q. Is there anything that you can say about that or would wish to say about that?
A. No.

[Eamonn Clarke · Rating 4 out of 5]

What is the truth? How long does it take to find it? And how much does it cost?
In the case of the Saville inquiry into Bloody Sunday the answers to the last two questions would appear to be ten years and about £200 million.

Lord Saville's report runs to ten volumes and few will have read it all. Instead I turned to this book which I listened to through audible. The author begins by considering how memories may have faded or possibly changed in the thirty years between Bloody Sunday and the start of the Saville inquiry. In particular he focuses on a small but gruesome detail concerning the eyelid of one victim which has become incorporated into many people's memories as a form of legend. I was reminded of the first episode of the podcast Serial and the journalist's introduction about how many months she had spent on the almost impossible task of trying to work out what one teenager had been doing during a 45 minute period 15 years previously.

Saville's ten year process managed the momentous task of detailing what happened in ten minutes of shooting that took place one Sunday morning in 1972. His conclusions are powerful and inescapable and this book manages to sum them up expertly.

Understandably this is only a précis of all the evidence that the inquiry heard and for obvious reasons the author does concentrate on some of the more colourful characters who appeared in the witness box: Bernadette Devlin, David Shayler, Edward Heath and Martin McGuinness being the best examples, but this does make for a fascinating listen.

It's a powerful piece of reporting and one that I found totally compelling.

[Carla Groom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eye-opening from the perspective of Northern Irish history (which I've been fascinated by since school) and also the working of one of the longest inquiries ever to take place in Britain.

Murray has taken the extensive records of the Saville Inquiry and turned them into a readable book which blends the legal, political, psychological and forensic elements of the evidence given. And despite the fact that we all know the horrific way in which that day in 1972 turned out, it still feels like a page-turning detective book. Which in a way, it is.

Having read it, I don't feel like I know what happened that day, but I do have a better idea of the gaps in our knowledge, and the implication of those gaps for what has happened since.

[AttackGirl · Rating 5 out of 5]

Doug's gruesome details of brains, blood and choppy details I could do without, but people do get what they ask for and it is named Bloody Sunday.
Doug is calm and articulate, his presentation of "The normalization of savagery" is well researched and enjoyable, as is his youtube talks & lectures. His fearless tackling of those messy topics separating us all under Politically Correct conversations has pushed us further apart and has now brought ruin to Europe as he has discussed in his other book. This book is no less presented under the same straight forward truth.

Great Job Douglas, keep up the good work, we need real heroes not afraid to confront what some are even afraid to speak.

[Karl · Rating 5 out of 5]

An astonishing book and a difficult topic given that there is blame and suspicion on all sides. However, it's handles the issues well and points out that all parties lied to some extent but the army the most. Fourteen people were murdered and no one has served a day for it. Indeed, the names of the soldiers are still witheld to this day.

[Don · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having lived through all this the book confirms many things I thought at the time. Blame on all sides but army the most particularly as per leadership from above. let's try and make sure circumstances never arise again.

[Lachlan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent and very detailed summary of a very important inquiry, the report for which few are likely to read. It also gives insight into broader issues and attitudes within British and Irish society.

[Alastair Walker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superbly researched and gripping to read, an excellent piece of work.

[Peter Chapman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent description of the events and the inquiry. I read it some time ago so cannot give a detailed summary.

[Vera Saunders · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thirty years! How is anyone meant to give accurate retelling over and over about something that took place 30 years previously? What a terrible shame it was that the government hung on to Northern Ireland, even if many of them had still wanted to be part of the UK, so much devastation could have been saved if we’d said bye bye.
The British soldiers, involved, seemed to have to go through torture, in the courts of enquiry. They certainly served their time for their mistakes.
But as I have noticed over my lifetime, the Irish don’t like the English, and will always make that clear.
How strange is it that all the atrocities of the Irish via the IRA get glossed over whilst wanting to pin some unknowable shooting by soldiers just attempting to do their miserable job, in a miserable place, decades earlier?
The public in the court were clapping McGuinnes, yet he did nothing to help anyone, certainly not the Irish relations who had kept the whole thing rolling on.

For those of us who lived between Guildford and Brighton in the 1970s, it all seems totally wrong to keep on at these soldiers, when the IRA did so many horrific, anonymous and despicable attacks on true innocents!
So the continual inexplicit depth of this enquiry is just unbelievable. All my sympathy is for the soldiers.
Fortunately I did not research and write this book, and Douglas Murray is the most dispassionate writer one could wish for. Born a month after my own son, just as my children and I went off to join my husband in the Middle East for the next 10 years, so it was good to be out of that terrorising conflict.
A wonderful truth-telling, dispassionate account of that muddle, in Douglas Murray’s usual clear yet expansive style.

[Gerry O'Malley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Douglas Murray does a masterful job of condensing 30+ years of history into a digestible and understandable story. Murray wades through literally decades of documents and testimony and tells the story of Bloody Sunday by focusing on just a half-dozen or so key figures and events. By doing this he asks weaves a genuinely thrilling and harrowing timeline of the actions taken and murders that occurred along with the incompetence and cover-up. Murray never gets maudlin but the reader gets the sense that he is outraged at the lies that were told and he seems impressed with the steps Lord Saville took to try to create the definitive record of the people and events that led to the slaughter of fourteen innocent people. This book is a model for anyone interested in telling a clear, focused narrative of historically important but confusing and messy events. My only complaint is the printing is a little sloppy. There were several places in the book where it seemed that a word was missing and in one location, an entire section of a page was duplicated, so as I read the text I came to the realization that I had already read that very same series of paragraphs and I had to skip ahead to try to find where the narrative picked up again. I expected better attention to detail from Murray and his publishers.

[Andrew Railton · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am an avid reader of Douglas Murrays works and a keen follower of his general content and debates. In short, I am a fan.
This is not his best work. The editing is poor, with some paragraphs being repeated on the same page.
It is also clear that this is not written by a soldier.
Any civilian deaths in war, and that is what the "troubles" were, are regrettable but inevitable.
Anyone who has served will tell you that things are not equal. The British soldiers are in a place where they are not wanted, don't want to be and are in constant fear for their lives. They work within strict guidelines that are not followed by the opposition. They wear uniforms, so are easily identified. The opposition doesn't and is not.
The inquiry and this book seem to me to be conducted and written in an effort to make the local population feel better. There is no similar enquiry into the conduct of the terrorists ( and I use that word conciously) on this day or any other.

I wonder, given Douglas's staunch and in my view, correct defence of Israel and Israeli Defence Force, whether he would write this book with the knowledge he has today?

[Luke Briddon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Let me first say as a borderline obsessive amateur historian of the troubles I am ashamed it’s taken me so long to discover this outstanding book. Douglas Murray stands alone in the world today in his ability to give an honest evaluation often against the wave of popular opinion. Within this book he ensures to give a rounded and fair evaluation of the findings made by the Savile inquiry, rather than simply pointing out the headline piece. An important read for those of a logical view that we must stop deifying those who found peace reluctantly after years of committing acts of heinous violence over those who sought peace all along.

[Jamie · Rating 5 out of 5]

There are many, perhaps too many that have views and opinions on what happened that day, myself included. To those I can only suggest, strongly suggest that you read this book. The conclusions to tne report are not conclusive as more than several from the civilian and terrorist sides lied and refused to give evidence. Equally, the evidence given by soldiers was contradictory. No one from any side comes out of this blameless.

[Darren Hardesty · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing book. I did not realise how little i actually knew about this terrible event. The book is incredibly well written it gives actual testimony and does not try and draw conclusions that are not supported.

[Kevin McAvoy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Listened to the audiobook over 4 days.
A very good accounting of the day, the victims, the murderers, and the British army General (Ford) whose troops could do no wrong. ( they did)
Better than any docs made about the day.
Enjoyable courtroom banter from McGuigan.
Top notch book.

[Marty Clarke · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s hard to find an objective take on anything troubles related, especially when the subject is Bloody Sunday. Murray’s take on this is very balanced and the reader can be assured that there is none of the usual propaganda from either side that permeates through most other books on the subject.

[James Leet · Rating 4 out of 5]

Given the amount of source material, this was a really impressive effort to distill the key points and describe the complexity of the tragedy. The facts are dealt with objectively while highlighting the obvious moral failings.

[Daire Hogan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fair and balanced while remaining a page turner. Murray's skill as a writer is on full display as he leads the reader through the Saville Inquiry.

[Tommy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent read; it is very well balanced and allows the reader to draw their own conclusions - where possible - on the many loose ends of the day.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting history I hadn't heard of until reading this. He did a good job condensing all the information surrounding the complicated event. He even kept me interested to see what would happen next.

[Bobby Daugherty · Rating 3 out of 5]

An account of the trial that took place over 20 years after the events of Bloody Sunday in Ireland. It is primarily an account of the trial and relevent testimony.

[Simon Parsons · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredibly interesting and well constructed book (I listened to the audiobook)

[Martin Hanaka · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not Murray’s best work

[Michael Anton · Rating 2 out of 5]

dull and boring