The political background in Britain at the time in question was as follows: 5 October 1974, Guildford pub bombing, five dead; 7 November 1974, Woolwich bombing followed by the Balcomb Street siege; 28 November 1974, Birmingham bombings, 21 dead. The Prevention of Terrorism Act was also passed that year. On 4 March 1976 Annie Maguire who was then aged 40 and her husband Paddy, an ex-British soldier, were each sentenced to 14 years imprisonment for possession of explosives. Her two sons, Vincent who was aged 13 and Patrick who was aged 16, were sentenced to four and five years imprisonment respectively for possession of explosives. Her brother William Smith, her brother-in-law, Guiseppe Conlon, and a friend, Patrick O'Neill, each got 12 years imprisonment for possession of explosives.
It is important to recall that the nitroglycerine test, in the context of the recent decision of the British Court of Appeal, allegedly reveal traces, not more than a microgram, that is, equivalent to a millionth part of a sugar cube, on plastic gloves which Mrs. Maguire used. The defence was refused permission to have independent tests done. Tests were done on each hand and on scrapings from under nails of the accused persons. A positive result was recorded from every scraping. All the samples were then destroyed. The forensic expert from Woolwich Arsenal who carried out the nitroglycerine tests was an 18 year old apprentice with two months experience.
The explosives test used was the TLC test, or thin layer chromatography test, a modification of the now discredited Greiss test. The TLC test was invented by Mr. John Yallop who had worked at Woolwich Arsenal for 30 years. Mr. Yallop appeared for the defence and stated that "no competent scientist could do otherwise then conclude that the ...results are not due to presence of nitroglycerine". Mr. Yallop stated that positive tests can be got using the TLC test from household products like washing powder, air freshner, nail varnish and polish and also stated that cigarette smoke is capable of giving TLC test positive results. Mr. Yallop was also critical that corroboration or control tests were never carried out at Woolwich Arsenal.
To put the matter in perspective the verdict of half innocent, half guilty by the Court of Appeal in the Maguire case has no precedent in English law. When the Sir John May inquiry does what the Court of Appeal could not do, that is, introduce a verdict of absolute blamelessness, the Maguires will be found not guilty of the remotest association with the crimes with which they were charged. The Court of Appeal could not find the seven innocent. Neither could they hand down a not guilty verdict.
As the House is aware, a towel was produced from somewhere unknown. It was suggested by the Court of Appeal that that article was responsible for the contamination of the hands of all of the accused — what a farce and a travesty of justice. This infamous towel had never been heard of before and has not been seen since, yet it allowed the Court of Appeal to give a so-called face saving verdict, to save the faces of the British Judiciary. In the opinion of eminent practioners of the law, it is the verdict in the Maguire case which will end the role of the Court of Appeal in cases involving glaring miscarriages of justices. It was a wretched verdict handed down by judges in the best tradition of Lord Lane in the case of the Birmingham Six appeal.
Apart altogether from the need to place this case and this infamy on the record of the House, my intention in raising the matter is to ask the Taoiseach and the Government to protest to the British authorities in the strongest possible terms within whatever mechanism is available to them, in particular the Anglo-Irish Conference, about this verdict. As the House is aware, the Conference is due to meet on the 16th of this month and I genuinely ask the Taoiseach, his Ministers or whoever will represent the Government at the Conference — presumably, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Justice — to do what I ask.