Declassified docs show family mislead and defrauded by MoD in 1971 killing

Killed man was 'innocent' - compensation valued at £10,000 - none of this admitted to family - £500 paid

 

see here for pdf (pdf)

Transcript:

 

21 June 1977
Mary Jane Morrison Quinn v MOD

  1. I spoke briefly to Anthony about this case and he is digging out the DAPM’s report. I enclose Council’s Direction of Proofs and an earlier opinion from which you will see that this may well be a case we can defend successfully in Court.
  2. At present I have only rather sketchy information about the incident leading to this action but it concerns the fatal shooting of Christopher Quinn of 14 Unity Place on 13 November 1971. Quinn was shot when the Army opened fire on a group of gunmen. It is not clear whether or not he was involved. The action is brought by his widow.
  3. The case is to be heard on Wednesday next (29th) which gives us very little time but I should appreciate your early advice as to whether there would be any political constraint on fighting this case in court, also for any further information you may have on Quinn.
  4. Unfortunately three of the witness have now left the Army and have not yet agreed to attend but arrangements have been made for the local Claims officers to visit them in an encouraging sort of way. Failing that we will need to subpoena should we decide to fight.
  5. I am grateful for your help and apologise for the shortness of time available. I am faxing an advance copy of this letter to you (minus enclosures) to speed things up a little.

 

 

September 1977
N Ireland Civil Litigation – Mary Jane Morrison Quinn v MOD

  1. An action has been brought by Ms M J M Quinn in respect of the death of her husband, Christopher, as a result of a shooting incident on 4 November 1971 in Belfast.
  2. Christopher Quinn was shot when the Army opened fire on a gunman, but it is fairly certain that Quinn was not involved with the gunman, but simply got in the way.
  3. The case was valued at some £10,000 and it has been our intention to fight the case on the grounds that the soldiers concerned were justified in opening fire when they did, and had acted in accordance with their instructions. We knew that the chances of winning the case were not good, as a Jury is likely to be sympathetic with a widow left with a young family to support, however we felt that the onus should be put upon the Plaintiff to prove her case in Court. Thus we would be seen to support the soldiers’ action.
  4. Our council has now told us that Mrs Quinn would be prepared to accept a total of £750 in settlement of this case with judgment in MOD’s favour as part of the terms of the settlement. This represents a very small amount compared with the original estimate of damages and would in fact be cheaper for us than the cost of running the case, as we would not be able to recover witness costs even if we won. As judgment would be in our favour the settlement would reflect well on the MOD from a political viewpoint. We have therefore authorised our Senior Council to settle.
  5. As Ms Quinn has a family of young children the settlement must be agreed by the court, and this will be done on Tuesday 20 September. If the court considers the settlement to be too low the case will be rearranged and heard at some later date.

    Mrs Painter
    Legal Sec c

 

 

Christopher Quinn

Home