nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Very confusing

Jaime and

I was reading into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings on 17 May 1974 as I'm doing an essay on it as part of my History and Politics course in Trinity. The car that exploded on Parnell Street killing 11 people was 'hijacked' in north Belfast that morning. Here is the statement from the owner, William Scott, a 62 year-old night security man:

“At 10.00 a.m. I was changing my clothes and the front door was open. I heard
a step on the stairs and two men came into my bedroom, they were both
wearing some sort of mask. One of them shoved me on the bed and took the keys to the car. They had pistols and were around about 6ft with sallow complexions.
They said I would get my car back in 2 hours but they kept me there all day till
4 o’clock. They made me stay upstairs while they played cards downstairs. At
4 o’clock they said they were going and told me not to come out for half an
hour or I’d be shot. I came out about 4.20 and informed the police. The car was a 1970 olive green Hillman Avenger DIA 4063. I was not injured by any of these men. Two at least of them were wearing
black gloves but they had them off when they were playing cards.”

His insurance man arrived 30 minutes after the men entered his house:

"When I called I went into the living room. The front door was slightly ajar. His car was not outside. I saw Mr Scott was standing at the fireplace. He came over to the front window and got me the insurance book
and the money. There were three men standing in the living room, but none of
them spoke to me. I did not pay any attention to them as there has been men in
the house some other times when I call. None of these men were wearing
masks. I could not describe these men as everything looked normal to me and
I did not pay any attention to them. I did not see any guns. When I came in they appeared to be in the middle of a friendly conversation and the atmosphere was not in any way unusual.”

From the Barron Report into the car bombs.

Can somebody explain? This has to be one of the most confusing items I have ever come across.

Why did he leave the front door open? If he was made to
stay upstairs, how did he know that the men were playing cards, and that they had
taken their gloves off to do so? What is with the friendly chat? Who's lying here?

So many questions.

If anybody can help?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

FrancieBrady

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It could have been locked. And he could have given them the keys, and got them back the next day. How would the insurance prove any of this when the car was blown up?

I am just saying, it was done. It gave credence to claims if there was a bit of a barney over getting cars.

dxhound2005

FrancieBrady wrote: »

In an ideal world, yes. But as I said, he wouldn't be the first to not realise what he was getting involved in.
An unlocked car probably would have voided any payout.

I stress, I have no idea whether he was involved or not.

It could have been locked. And he could have given them the keys, and got them back the next day. How would the insurance prove any of this when the car was blown up?

FrancieBrady

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It lead to a lot of hassle for Scott. The report does not conclude that he was involved. It would have been much easier for him to leave his car unlocked for them to steal, if he wanted to supply the car for the bomb.

And if they had wanted to try to conceal their identity, they would have been better to steal a car in the usual way, not kidnap the owner.

In an ideal world, yes. But as I said, he wouldn't be the first to not realise what he was getting involved in.
An unlocked car probably would have voided any payout.

I stress, I have no idea whether he was involved or not.

hatrickpatrick

Jaime and wrote: »

Explain why they wouldn't?

I'm just asking for opinions on the most likely reasons.

dxhound2005

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why?
Quite well known that both sides did things like this. Easy no hassle acquisition of a car.

It lead to a lot of hassle for Scott. The report does not conclude that he was involved. It would have been much easier for him to leave his car unlocked for them to steal, if he wanted to supply the car for the bomb.

And if they had wanted to try to conceal their identity, they would have been better to steal a car in the usual way, not kidnap the owner.

FrancieBrady

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Scott reported the theft of his car to the RUC about 20 minutes after the thieves departed his house. That was well before the bomb went off, and it does not support any case that he was involved.

Why?
Quite well known that both sides did things like this. Easy no hassle acquisition of a car.

AllForIt

The butler did it.

dxhound2005

Scott reported the theft of his car to the RUC about 20 minutes after the thieves departed his house. That was well before the bomb went off, and it does not support any case that he was involved.

Elmer Blooker

Dial Hard wrote: »

In After Hours???

.... you're looking for info in After Hours?
Get your hands on a copy of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings by an author named Joe Tiernan.

beachhead

The cosgrave government required that an incident occur in the Republic and they obliged it.One party to the incident refuses to disclose their actions.44 years later and we will never know the truth.

FrancieBrady

Jaime and wrote: »

Why wouldn't they reopen the case?

You can't reopen a case when a government has buried files pertaining to it.

Chancer3001

His bedroom was downstairs.

They kept him in sight while they got organised. They played cards and told him what they expecyed.
During this the insurance man showed up a d left again.

Then they told him stay upstairs and not to come down

He came down they were gone

Dial Hard

Jaime and wrote:

I'm just asking for opinions on the most likely reasons.

In After Hours???

Jaime and

Khari Noisy Wool wrote: »

Sounds like a very biased essay.

Bye.

No pal, I've interviewed survivors as well.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Sounds like a very biased essay.

Bye.

Jaime and

Jaime and wrote: »

I am looking to speak with the following individual about the bombings:

thefreelibrary.com/amp/PRIME%2bSUSPECTS%253A%2bNAMED..%2bAS%2bUVF%2bBOSS%2bWH0%2bSE%2bUNIT%2bKILLED%2b33%253B%2bLoyalist...-a0113060197

Firstly, is it legal?

Secondly, is it safe?

I think an 'insider' input would contribute greatly to the project.

The link doesn't work:

A TERRORIST named as a suspect in the murders of 33 people in The Troubles' worst day of violence can be identified today as a car mechanic living in Scotland.

Stewart Young, of Troon, is named in an Irish Government report as a Loyalist terrorist who helped carry out bombings in Dublin and the border town of Monaghan on May 17, 1974, which killed 33 people.

Young is accused of being a ''prime suspect'' in the atrocity and a key member of an Ulster Volunteer Force ''heavy gang''.

He has also been linked to bomb and gun attacks on two pubs in 1975 and 1976 which killed five.

Young settled in Troon in 1977. Now in his late 50s, he runs a garage, Young's Autos, and is reputed to be friendly and easy-going.

But the Sunday Mail can reveal he has been interviewed by Irish and Scots police over the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and refused to co-operate. No one has ever been charged over them.

Just weeks ago, the Irish Government published the findings of a four-year public inquiry into the atrocity presided over by Justice Henry Barron.

The report names suspects, including Stewart Young and Robin 'The Jackal' Jackson, a notorious Loyalist killer who died of cancer in 1998.

It also claims British soldiers and officers of the Royal Ulster Constabulary helped Loyalist terrorists and accuses the UK Government, including ex-Northern Ireland Secretary Dr John Reid, of obstructing the inquiry.

Young is named by witnesses and inquiry sources as one of two men who stole the green Hillman Minx which was packed with explosives and scrap metal and driven to the centre of Monaghan.

The other thief was Jackson, who is thought to be behind more than 20 murders. The car exploded outside a pub, killing six people instantly. Another died in hospital.

The blast came 90 minutes after three car explosions in Dublin which killed 26 people including a nine-months-pregnant woman and injured more than 250.

An Irish police intelligence report written weeks after the bombings identified Young as the boss of the Port a down UVF unit behind the blasts.

The Barron report said: ''Of particular interest is a section of the Mid-Ulster UVF the group strongly suspected by many of having carried out the Dublin and Monaghan bombs.'' Justice Barron says another intelligence report listed units of the Mid-Ulster UVF. That said: ''This is divided into companies as follows: 1. Port a down 60-strong, OC Stewart Young.'' The report listed three other companies. The Barron Report reveals Young was interviewed by Irish detectives in Scotland in the summer of 1994.

A detective from Strathclyde Police, DS Gordon Smyth, was also present. The report says: ''Young declined to supply a written statement and denied involvement. He denied knowing most of the suspects.'' The Sunday Mail has also learned that, shortly before fleeing to Scotland, Young was linked to two gun and bomb attacks which killed five people.

An Army intelligence source said: ''Throughout the early 1970s, Stewart Young and his brother Ivor were heavily involved in terrorist actions.'' Ivor Young is understood to have spent time in Kilmarnock and May bole, Ayrshire, where he ran a pub. He is now a prominent figure in the Orange Order's Drumcree protest.

Stewart Young's wife Kathleen said yesterday her husband was away on a trip to Northern Ireland. Of the Barron Report, she said: ''All that was 30 years ago. I am not saying it should be forgotten.

''He never had anything to do with anything like that. We have lived here for 26 years and my husband has a business which he has worked hard at. The reason we moved was that he was being hounded by everybody.''

I would ask that man in the name of God to show some moral courage, to prick his conscience and let us now what happened and why?

Stewart Young, who bombed Monaghan town, is the man I'd like to interview.

Jaime and

I am looking to speak with the following individual about the bombings:

thefreelibrary.com/amp/PRIME%2bSUSPECTS%253A%2bNAMED..%2bAS%2bUVF%2bBOSS%2bWH0%2bSE%2bUNIT%2bKILLED%2b33%253B%2bLoyalist...-a0113060197

Firstly, is it legal?

Secondly, is it safe?

I think an 'insider' input would contribute greatly to the project.

[Deleted User]

Handled very badly by coalition government and Gardai. They already came out of it badly; a full enquiry would expose them as utterly spineless.

Jaime and

Why wouldn't they reopen the case?

[Deleted User]

The times don't add up. Night shift workers would generally get home around 8.00am and the car was spotted on the M1 around 10.30am.

Don't rely on just the report.
Don Mullan's book is probably the best account. Joe Tiernan's quite good too.

It's my earliest televisual memory.

FrancieBrady

Jaime and wrote: »

According to the report, Mr Scott was friendly with the British army and had acquaintances in the UVF.

The car was driven from Ardoyne to Portadown where the bomb was placed. It was them driven to Parnell Street.

It is likely he was in some sort of cahoots with them, but he was apparently so devastated by what happened that he moved to Yorkshire a year afterwards where he died in 1982.

Maybe he didn't know exactly what they were going to do.

Jaime and

According to the report, Mr Scott was friendly with the British army and had acquaintances in the UVF.

The car was driven from Ardoyne to Portadown where the bomb was placed. It was them driven to Parnell Street.

It is likely he was in some sort of cahoots with them, but he was apparently so devastated by what happened that he moved to Yorkshire a year afterwards where he died in 1982.

FrancieBrady

There is the possibility he was in cahoots with them and this was his way of being compensated for the lost car?

Or, he could hear them playing cards, came down the stairs and noticed one of them tidying up with his gloves off and made an assumption.

Loads of possible credible explanations. You just have to pick one you thinkmost likely...because I don't think they'll reopen the case.

super_furry

Rats out!

aaakev

Sounds like either a gay orgy or else he was in on it. Ill go with option 1. Please make sure you give me credit in your essay

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Jaime and wrote: »

I'm trying to get opinions on what would be most likely. The door was left ajar by Scott when he came home at 8am. Why did he do that? He was threatened by terrorists who wanted to steal his car to murder people. He wasn't allowed leave his bedroom in case they killed him. But yet he was having a nice cosy conversation with his captors in the living room half an hour later.

It just doesn't make any sense TBH.

Jeez, they're holding the guy...insurance man appears at the door...quick pretence at having a chat...

Have you never been in a situation where you're talking about somebody or something when someone else comes in and you seamlessly switch to another topic?

We often leave the door open here. Nothing strange in that.

Jaime and

Khari Noisy Wool wrote: »

Door ajar because they left it ajar. They had started playing cards before they put him upstairs.

Again, how would we know? Does this now qualify as acceptable research for third level. The bibliography should be interesting.

I'm trying to get opinions on what would be most likely. The door was left ajar by Scott when he came home at 8am. Why did he do that? He was threatened by terrorists who wanted to steal his car to murder people. He wasn't allowed leave his bedroom in case they killed him. But yet he was having a nice cosy conversation with his captors in the living room half an hour later.

It just doesn't make any sense TBH.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Door ajar because they left it ajar. They had started playing cards before they put him upstairs.

Again, how would we know? Does this now qualify as acceptable research for third level. The bibliography should be interesting.

FFred

Thinly veiled Tiocfaidh ár lá thread ...

Jaime and

Khari Noisy Wool wrote: »

Honestly? How do you expect anybody in After Hours to have any legitimate answers?

Explain why they wouldn't?

I'm just asking for opinions on the most likely reasons.