🔗 Share this article

Sunday 30 January 1972 stands as among the deadliest – and significant – occasions throughout thirty years of conflict in the region.

Throughout the area where events unfolded – the legacy of that fateful day are painted on the buildings and seared in public consciousness.

A protest demonstration was held on a cold but bright day in the city.

The demonstration was opposing the policy of internment – detaining individuals without due process – which had been implemented in response to an extended period of conflict.

Military personnel from the Parachute Regiment fatally wounded 13 people in the district – which was, and continues to be, a predominantly nationalist area.

A specific visual became notably prominent.

Images showed a religious figure, the priest, waving a stained with blood fabric in his effort to protect a group moving a teenager, Jackie Duddy, who had been fatally wounded.

Media personnel documented much footage on the day.

Documented accounts includes Fr Daly telling a journalist that military personnel "just seemed to discharge weapons randomly" and he was "totally convinced" that there was no justification for the discharge of weapons.

This account of events was disputed by the original examination.

The Widgery Tribunal concluded the military had been fired upon initially.

During the resolution efforts, the administration established a fresh examination, after campaigning by surviving kin, who said the initial inquiry had been a whitewash.

During 2010, the conclusion by Lord Saville said that on balance, the paratroopers had discharged weapons initially and that not one of the casualties had presented danger.

The then head of state, the Prime Minister, expressed regret in the Parliament – declaring deaths were "without justification and inexcusable."

The police commenced look into the incident.

An ex-soldier, known as the defendant, was charged for homicide.

He was charged regarding the fatalities of one victim, 22, and twenty-six-year-old the second individual.

Soldier F was further implicated of seeking to harm several people, other civilians, further individuals, another person, and an unknown person.

Exists a legal order preserving the veteran's identity protection, which his legal team have argued is essential because he is at risk of attack.

He told the examination that he had only fired at people who were carrying weapons.

That claim was disputed in the concluding document.

Information from the inquiry would not be used straightforwardly as evidence in the legal proceedings.

In court, the veteran was hidden from public with a privacy screen.

He made statements for the initial occasion in the proceedings at a hearing in that month, to answer "not responsible" when the charges were read.

Family members of the deceased on the incident made the trip from Derry to Belfast Crown Court each day of the trial.

One relative, whose relative was died, said they were aware that listening to the case would be difficult.

"I remember the events in my mind's eye," John said, as we visited the main locations discussed in the trial – from the street, where his brother was killed, to the adjacent the courtyard, where James Wray and the second person were died.

"It reminds me to where I was that day.

"I helped to carry my brother and put him in the vehicle.

"I went through each detail during the testimony.

"But even with experiencing the process – it's still meaningful for me."