A Derry man who says he saw IRA gunmen on Bloody Sunday tried to keep
the information off the record because he did not want to detract from the "cold-blooded murder" of that day, he claimed today.
Mr Charles McGill was also quoted as saying he would not allow the sightings to go into his statement to the Saville Inquiry was because he "has to live here" but denied from the witness box that those comments meant he was afraid of the consequences.
And under examination from Mr Edmund Lawson QC, acting for most of the soldiers, he said he believed the new probe was a whitewash "to a certain extent" and added: "Time will tell when it comes to fruition."
Mr McGill claimed he saw a man with a rifle, whom he believed to be a member of Official IRA, young men trying to get rid of a trayful of about 10 nail bombs, and a carload of Provisional IRA gunmen, after the army shootings, but he only put his name to the allegations two days ago.
He spoke of the sightings during an interview with Inquiry solicitors, Eversheds, in 1998 but a note taken by the firm stated: "Mr McGill stressed that he does not want this mentioned in his statement - he says that he has to live around here and he only gave us the information after we assured him that his statement would only be signed when he had amended it as he wished and was happy with it."
No mention was made of the sightings in Mr McGill's statement, signed in June 1999, but were contained in a supplementary statement signed on Monday of this week which said: "On reflection I have now concluded that what I said to Eversheds should be made known to the tribunal and to the parties to the Inquiry."
Earlier Lord Saville moved to allay fears that the episode demonstrated a willingness by the tribunal to allow witnesses to go "off the record".
Lord Gifford QC, acting for the family of Jim Wray, who was killed, had expressed concern that Mr McGill appeared to have made statements "off the record" which, until he made a supplementary statement on Monday, were not intended to be divulged to the parties but seemed to have been available to the tribunal.
Mr Gifford asked if there were other examples of "off the record" statements and requested that no witness should be allowed give statements in such a fashion.
Lord Saville replied that he was not aware that member of the tribunal were aware anything that had been said "off the record".
"My information is that people are clearly and unequivocally told that anything they say to Eversheds will not be treated and cannot be treated as off the record," he said.
PA