UVF set to admit it played a role in the Ballymuprhy massacre
The loyalist paramilitary group is apparently set to say one of its gunmen was responsible for some of the ten deaths in August 1971.
Last updated 3rd May 2018
Loyalist paramilitaries are set to admit a role in a notorious shooting incident involving the British Army that saw 10 people killed in Belfast.
It is understood a group of former members of the Ulster Volunteer Force are to provide information to the Coroner's Court in Belfast indicating that one of its gunmen was involved in the Ballymurphy shootings of 1971.
Ten people, including a Catholic priest and a mother-of-eight, were killed during three days of gunfire involving members of the Parachute Regiment in August 1971.
The shootings took place as the army moved into republican strongholds in west Belfast to arrest IRA suspects in the wake of the introduction of internment.
Responsibility for the deaths has long been attributed solely to soldiers, amid disputed claims they were returning IRA fire.
The intervention from a group describing themselves as UVF "veterans'' comes ahead of the long waiting inquest into the controversial deaths this autumn.
It is understood the men, who have secured legal representation, allege that a UVF gunman opened fire on civilians in Ballymurphy from the nearby loyalist Springmartin estate.
The name of the individual and details about the weapon are potentially set to be passed to the coroner.
Billy Hutchinson, the leader of the Progressive Unionist Party (PUP), which has long-established links with the UVF, said: "I think this is significant that we have people who are actually going to do this.
"Their statement is progressive and significant.
"In many ways that significance will be judged by others about how significant it is.
"If I am correct, there were three actors in all of this - the UVF, the IRA and the British Army. So I think if the IRA were to give the information about what happened at the time I think it would be very significant - if the two organisations were giving evidence.
"My understand of the veterans is they wanted to do it, they believe it needed to be done and they are doing it.''
But families of those killed have expressed scepticism at the UVF move.
Relatives questioned why the loyalist paramilitary group did not acknowledge responsibility at the time of the killings in August 1971 and is only coming forward almost 50 years later.
John Teggart, whose father Danny was shot dead, said he was "dubious'' about the UVF's motives and asked whether it was a bid to "muddy the waters''.
"I am sceptical about the story that has been put out to the media,'' he said.
"The families got together at short notice and have discussed it.''
He said the focus needed to remain on the soldiers.
"The evidence that we have put forward to the coroner's court is that the paratroopers shot our loved ones and that's where the focus needs to go back on,'' said Mr Teggart.
"What we need to do is ask questions. Who is this person? Is he alive? Has he made a statement before?
"And any evidence that there is needs to be put to the coroner's court. If there is a rifle there for ballistics (tests) - there are ongoing tests being done for ballistics at the coroner's preparing for the inquests in September and that would be welcomed to get in now.''
He questioned whether the UVF move was a "deflection'' tactic.
"They are not doing the Ballymurphy families any favours, their intention isn't to help the Ballymurphy families or help anybody for that matter,'' he said.
"It's a paramilitary force, so anything they have said is going to be dubious.''
Solicitor for the families Padraig O'Muirigh said the focus had to be maintained on tracing the soldiers involved and warned that the UVF statement could not be allowed to act as a "distraction''.
"This isn't the first time that loyalist gunmen have been referenced in relation to Ballymurphy, so it's not a complete shock to the families,'' he said.
"It is very unclear what this evidence or what this information is, so it's too early to give any clear response to it.
"We would simply urge that the information be brought to the coroner immediately and is acted on.''
A fresh inquest has been scheduled to start in September.