The acquittal of Soldier F at Laganside Crown Court is a moment that demands clarity, honesty and courage. His trial was long delayed, tightly focused and ultimately unsuccessful — but it has not altered the truth of what happened on the streets of Derry in January 1972. Today’s verdict does not exonerate the actions of Soldier F, nor does it rewrite history. What it does is expose, once again, the catastrophic failure of the British state to investigate its own crimes and to hold its agents to account.
In July 2021, commentator Douglas Murray wrote in the Spectator: “It always seemed to me that if anyone was deserving of prosecution, then it was him. . . . F started lying from the moment the shooting stopped.” It is a rare moment when families, campaigners, and a journalist who has long defended state force find themselves in agreement. Yet here, Murray identified something undeniable: Soldier F’s conduct — both on Bloody Sunday and in later attempts to conceal it — was indefensible.
And yet, in 2025, after decades of delay, Soldier F walks away without conviction. That outcome must be understood not through the narrow frame of a single trial but through the wider reality of state obstruction and state impunity.
His Honour Judge Patrick Lynch, applying the law as it stands, acquitted Soldier F. The court was confronted with evidential gaps that were neither accidental nor unavoidable. The standard of proof in a criminal court is high, and it should be. But it is also true that the evidential collapse in this case flowed directly from the fact that there was no proper investigation at the time of the killings and no sincere effort to conduct one for decades afterwards. This was not a failure of memory. It was a failure of will.
In the immediate aftermath of Bloody Sunday, neither the Royal Ulster Constabulary nor the British Army sought to gather evidence, preserve testimony, secure a scene, interview soldiers as suspects, or…
Auteur: John Finucane
