Lawyers for former Guardsman Dennis Hutchings seek disclosure material ahead of February trial

By Q Radio news

LAWYERS for former Life Guardsman Dennis Hutchings are seeking disclosure material from the prosecution dating back 46 years.

Mr Hutchings is due to stand trial on February 1, 2021 for the attempted murder of John Patrick Cunningham.

Mr Cunningham was shot in the back by the Army with an SLR rifle in a field as he ran away on the outskirts of Benburb in Co Tyrone on June 15, 1974.

The 79-year-old former soldier is further accused of "unlawfully and maliciously attempting to cause grievous bodily harm to John Patrick Cunningham with intent to do him grievous bodily harm''.

Prosecution lawyer David McNeill told a review hearing today (Friday) at Belfast Crown Court that the Public Prosecution Service was in receipt of a disclosure application from the defence dated September 25, 2020.

He said the material "requires to be litigated and is quite a large volume of material.''

Mr McNeill told Mr Justice McAlinden that the disclosure application related to a previous abuse of process application "arising from a breach of promise not to prosecute the defendant''.

That application had been previously ruled upon by another High Court judge, Mr Justice Colton, in May 2018.

The prosecution lawyer said that in an effort to deal with the application, he was proposing a time table be set to allow the PPS to respond to the application and a date set for the defence to reply.

He suggested a hearing date could be set for December this year which would be sufficient time for the disclosure hearing ahead of next year's non-jury Diplock-style trial.

Mr McNeill told the judge: "My application would be, given the complexity of the material being sought which dates back to 1974 and also 2011, to take the matter to November 20, 2020, to allow the PPS to respond.''

He added that the defence would then have two to three weeks "thereafter to respond and a hearing could be scheduled for the disclosure issue''.

Defence barrister Ian Turkinton told Mr Justice McAlinden that although another senior judge had ruled on a previous abuse of process application, "this is not a second bite at the same cherry''.

He said that in his ruling, Mr Justice Colton had identified that "there may be a further abuse of process application'' in the future.

Mr Turkington added that it was "in everybody's interest that this disclosure issue is settled before Christmas''.

Mr Justice McAlinden said it was his view that he should deal with all future applications in the case.

But he told the parties that he had a difficulty in hearing any further applications in the case before Christmas due to his timetable of work "unless something falls down out of my list''.

Mr Justice McAlinden ruled that the prosecution had four weeks to respond by November 20, 2020, to the defence application.

The defence then had three weeks to reply to the prosecution response.

The judge set the date for the disclosure hearing, which is expected to last two hours, for Friday, January 8, 2021.

Mr Hutchings was due to stand trial at Belfast Crown Court earlier this year.

But the start was adjourned because the he had a "chest infection'' and his doctor had advised it would be "prudent that he should mitigate his risk by staying at home, by virtue of the coronavirus".

At a previous review hearing in March this year, it was suggested that given the current pandemic, the trial could take place by Skype.

However, lawyers for the defendant said that there could be a visibility challenge over the use of Skye.

"The accused wants to be present at his trial. That's his firm instructions,'' said defence lawyer Ian Turkington.

Mr Turkington rejected any suggestion that his client was using his ongoing health problems and the Coronavirus outbreak "as a tool to delay” the proceedings''.

“It’s not safe for him to travel. The consultant said he should not travel and the reason for that is clear – between buses, trains, airports, airplanes and hotels, and backwards and forwards.

“He would prefer to be here for his trial. If the court insists that (Skype) is the way forward but it is not his expressed wish.”