RUC resists call for tests on interrogation notes

THE Royal Ulster Constabulary is resisting a request for the Esda testing of interrogation notes which a republican prisoner claims were fabricated and used to convict him of murder.

The prisoner claims he did not make the verbal admission which detectives testified he made in Belfast's Castlereagh interrogation centre. He wants the notes subjected to Esda (Electro-Static Data Analysis) tests which could, he argues, support his contention that the confession was concocted by police.

The prisoner concerned is a 38- year-old Londonderry man, Seamus Mullan, who is serving life imprisonment for the murder of a police reservist in 1985. He was convicted in 1987 and unsuccessfully appealed the following year.

In refusing to hand over the notes, the Chief Constable of the RUC, Sir Hugh Annesley, cited a practical reason rather than a legal one.

A letter written on behalf of the Chief Constable to the prisoner's solicitor said: 'The Chief Constable is obliged to bear in mind that if he grants your request he may be faced with similar requests in respect of a large number of criminal trials going back many years in which interview notes have played a significant part.'

The letter did not, however, absolutely rule out handing over the notes, saying that Sir Hugh was not prepared to accede 'unless a full and reasoned case for access to the interview notes is put forward in writing by the solicitor'.

The issue is of great legal significance, in that winning access to interview notes could open the floodgates for hundreds of similar demands from both republican and loyalist prisoners.

Over the past two decades many suspected terrorists have been convicted on confession evidence obtained in Castlereagh and other centres. The authorities' nightmare must be that further tests would show a pattern of doctored notes which could lead to a stream of reopened cases.

Last week the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, Sir Brian Hutton, ruled in the case of the 'UDR Four' that detectives had rewritten interview notes and lied under oath at the trial. Senior RUC officers had signed and authenticated the notes, falsely confirming the wrong dates. The actions of the officers involved have been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The UDR Four case was out of the ordinary in that Esda testing was allowed following a prolonged campaign. The Seamus Mullan case has attracted no such attention but is similar to that of hundreds of others and therefore represents an important test case.