Digest of Unreported Northern Ireland Cases
![handle is hein.journals/nilq27 and id is 77 raw text is: NOTES OF CASES
DIGEST OF UNREPORTED NORTHERN IRELAND CASES
ATrEMPT-see CRIMINAL LAW (2).
CRIMINAL LAW (1)-Shooting of a civilian held in lawful arrest by a soldier-man
arrested by soldier in a hostile area on suspicion of being involved in an explosion-
shot when allegedly attempting to escape-whether attempted murder-whether
intent to do grievous bodily harm-whether shooting justifiable-Criminal Law Act
(N.L) 1967, s. 3 :- The Queen v. Donald Ernest MacNaughton, Belfast City Com-
mission, ruling delivered by Lowry L.C.J., 5th September 1974.
The accused, a soldier, was charged with attempted murder and with causing
grievous bodily harm with intent to do grievous bodily harm. These charges
arose from a shooting incident when a civilian was wounded. At that time the
accused was in charge of an army patrol in a hostile area following an explosion.
The patrol met a man coming from the direction of the explosion and, suspecting
the man of being implicated in it, the accused arrested him under the Special Powers
Act. The evidence of the accused and of the man differed as to what subsequently
occurred. The accused alleged that the man was shot when attempting to escape.
The man claimed that he was ordered by the accused to climb over a fence to the
flank of the patrol and that he was shot by the accused when he did so.
Finding the accused not guilty on both charges, the learned trial judge held-
(i) The civilian was in lawful arrest under the Civil Authorities (Special
Powers) Act (N.I.) 1922, section 7, and article 11 of the Special Powers
regulations prior to the shooting.
(ii) The evidence of the civilian was unsatisfactory and inconsistent in
certain details, whereas the evidence of the accused and of the other
members of the patrol fitted together and was not mutually contradictory.
(iii) Accepting the accused's evidence as broadly correct and considering
the nature of the terrain and terrorist activity in the area, the prosecution
had failed to eliminate the reasonable possibility that the action of the
accused was reasonable in the circumstances.
CRIMINAL LAW (2)-Road Traffic offence-motor-car immobilised as result of
accident-appellant tried unsuccessfully to drive car away while under influence of
drink-whether appellant could properly be convicted of attempting to drive while
under influence of drink-Road Traffic Act (N.J.) 1970, s. 120 :- Robert Mervyn
Doherty v. John Clements, Court of Appeal, judgment delivered by Gibson L.J.,
McGonigal L.J. concurring, 7th October 1975.
The appellant's motor-car, while being driven by a friend, was involved in
an accident which rendered it immobile. The appellant, who was under the in-
fluence of drink and unaware of the extent of the damage, tried unsuccessfully
to drive the car away.
Spring, 1976]
NOTES OF CASES](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/nilq27&div=10&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Digest of Unreported Northern Ireland Cases
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most