Jailed loyalist killer Michael Stone “squandered” his one and only chance at an early release, the North’s Court of Appeal heard today.
Senior judges were told the Milltown Cemetery bomber is not entitled to any further opportunities after being sent back to prison for trying to murder Sinn Féin leaders Gerry Adams and the late Martin McGuinness at Stormont.
The claims were made as a sister of one of Stone’s victims mounted a new legal bid to ensure he remains behind bars.
Deborah McGuinness is appealing a High Court ruling that gave Sentence Review Commissioners (SRC) the right to consider his application to be freed early for a second time.
Although 65-year-old Stone was refused in September last year, the case centres on his ability to make further requests.
Counsel for Ms McGuinness insisted he should not be able to “turn on and off the tap of violence”.
Ronan Lavery QC argued: “The prisoner squandered his benefit and under the terms of this exceptional scheme isn’t entitled to re-apply on multiple occasions.”
Ms McGuinness’s brother, Thomas McErlean, was among three mourners Stone murdered in the attack on an IRA funeral at Milltown graveyard, west Belfast in March 1988. The former UDA man was also the gunman in three other killings.
He received a 30-year term for the sectarian murder campaign, but obtained an early release in 2000 under the Belfast Agreement.
Six years later, however, he was sent back to jail after trying to enter Parliament Buildings at Stormont, armed with explosives, knives and an axe, in a bid to kill Mr Adams and Mr McGuinness.
Stone denied it had been an attempt to murder the politicians, instead claiming it was an act of performance art.
He must remain in jail in 2024. His application to the SRC for release again under the terms of the Belfast Agreement led to last year’s High Court battle.
A judge ruled the body has legal power to consider further applications after identifying no prohibition in the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act 1998.
Even though Commissioners then assessed and denied Stone’s request, Ms McGuinness’s lawyers are challenging a determination they believe leaves him free to try again at any point.
“It gives a licence to prisoners to turn on and off the tap of violence as it suits them,” Mr Lavery contended.
“They get out for a while, change their mind and commit further acts of violence, come back in (and apply again). The scheme cannot possibly have meant that.”
Peter Coll QC, for the SRC, described the interpretation of the legislation as “nonsensical and illogical”.
The intention was for successive applications to be made if circumstances change or new material emerges, he submitted.
Mr Coll insisted the Commissioners’ powers guard against “vexatious or whimsical” applications, adding that the appellant’s case could leave those who suffered a miscarriage of justice languishing in jail.
Backing those submissions, Stone’s barrister contended that the legislation does not limit the number of times a prisoner can seek to be let out David Scoffield QC maintained: “The Act does allow us to have a second bite of the cherry.” Reserving judgment in the appeal, Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan pledged to give a decision as soon as possible.