The people who thought it was going to be a riot are Colonel Dalzell Payne, Dereck Wilford, Adjutant, Platoon sergeant. These are all people with links to the army. So they may be sympathetic to the army. Colonel Dalzell Payne says in source E “the Londonderry march would cause problems” he says this because of what happened in the past. From past experience he gathers that this march is going to be a riot. He suggests that it was definitely going to be a riot. He says this from his experience in the past In the documentary his tone of voice is very arrogant. He says “barrier 14 was definitely under threat” this tells us that he thought the march is not going to be peaceful. Dereck Wilford also said he was expecting trouble. “When we moved, we moved as we were up against an army” This implies he thought the marchers were outside there to cause trouble. He says this because he felt as though his troops were under threat. The platoon sergeant also thought it was going to be a riot, his tone of voice was very arrogant, (a know it all person). He judges it was a riot from what he heard. He says he heard firing from the flats. He says this because he is backing up the army. The platoon sergeant is part of the army therefore he would not like the reputation of the army to go down so he backs them up.
Edward Daley says “that situation I saw with my own eyes” This tells us that he actually saw the army firing first. He says this because he is telling us what he witnessed where he was standing on Bloody Sunday. Simon can only say this for where he was standing not every where else. He was an eye witness. The photographer also says the army fired first “the paratroops opened a dense crowd of people” He says this because he saw it with his own eyes; he was there on bloody Sunday. He as a character is very honest and open he is not arrogant. Simon Winchester another who says the army opened fire first. In source H “I do not think the IRA opened up first” This suggests that he saw no IRA people firing therefore it leads to us believing that the army shot first. Simon Winchester only says what he saw in the small area where he was. He says this because he saw it; he is a photographer so therefore he would have proof. This source is not reliable as others because he thinks what he says he is not certain of it. This is significant because this source may be sympathetic to the marchers.
The Widgery Tribunal concluded the marchers were shooting at the troops. This decision was made by ignoring the forensics and eyewitnesses. Lord Widgery favoured the army and that is why he came to this conclusion. Dereck Wilford says “the shot came first form the IRA then the army” this tells us that he thought and saw the marchers shooting first. He says this because he is part of the army therefore is backing them up. He was a very rude person, he was very ignorant at times in the documentary. This might suggest why he thought the marchers shot first. The platoon sergeant another person of the army also thought the marchers shot first. He says “the firing I heard was coming from the flats” he says this because he interprets the sound of guns to be guns from the IRA whereas they might have been from his own side. He comes out as an impolite person.
There are so many different interpretations of what happened on bloody Sunday I think this is because of people being on different sides either the armies or the marchers.
Father Denis Bradley says “the British army shot indiscriminately and everywhere around them without any provocation”. He says this on bloody Sunday in source G, this tells us that the 13 that were shot at indiscriminately and without warning, he says this because saw it. “I saw no one shooting at the troops”. Denis Bradley in person came out to be very honest and he also gave a balanced view of what happened on the day.
The Company Sergeant Major also says that the people that died were innocent civilians “I feel in my heart that all the civilians were innocent”. The Company Sergeant Major says the above quote which in turn means that he is going against his fellow soldiers also telling us that despite all the other army people he says the 13 died were innocent civilians. He says this because he is very honest. We tend to believe him because of his honesty and sincerity.
The forensic evidence most importantly backs up the eyewitnesses and tells us that the thirteen that died were innocent civilians. The forensic evidence tells us that Gerry McKinny was shot with his hands in the air therefore he could not have a weapon. The forensic evidence was put forward to Lord Widgery but was ignored.
These interpretations are completely different to the ones below, these say they were innocent the below witnesses say they were armed hooligans. These are different because different people said different things. Some people back the army up whilst others back the marches up. This is why there are many conflicting interpretations. There may be possible cover-ups by the army. Some may be biased.
Colonel Dalzell Payne says they were armed hooligans in Source E, “Core of hooligans”
He says this because in his eyes they were hooligans. He also says that if they shot at you and you replied them and killed them you stopped them killing you. So looking at what he says you can tell he is a very arrogant character. He says this because of his past experience and also because he is part of the army.
Dereck Wilford also says this, “Armed hooligan’s not innocent civilians”.
This suggests that he thought they were people with guns who wanted to shoot at the army. He says this because he is on the army’s side and backs them up. Dereck Wilford has an attitude problem and demonstrates it clearly in the documentary.
Lord Widgery also thought they were armed hooligans. In the tribunal it says, “There was evidence that three of the marchers had guns”.
This proves that he thought that the army was right to call them armed hooligans. He says this because he is biased and sympathetic towards the army. The narrator adds, “The evidence will not stand up in court today” This suggests he very definitely is on the army’s side.
Firstly the company Sergeant Major says, “It was chaos”. This shows he is a very honest and reliable witness even though he is in the army he tells the truth. He says this because he doesn’t agree with Dereck Wilford and most importantly he is open and honest.
The narrator also says that the operation was out of control, “It was chaos”
He says this on the TV footage because he was there and saw it. He gives a balanced view and is not biased. The narrator is also honest and sincere.
Denis Bradley also says the operation was chaotic. He says, “Soldiers were firing from the hip”
This suggests that it was an uncontrolled operation. He says this because he saw soldiers firing from there hips rather than having there eyes focused and firing from the correct position.
The people who say it was a controlled operation are: Dereck Wilford, Platoon Sergeant and the Adjutant. These are all the army officials and they all say that it was a controlled operation. I personally think they were backing each other up.
Dereck Wilford says, “It was a controlled operation in a relatively small area”
He says this because he doesn’t want people to think that the situation was chaotic and that he couldn’t handle it. He also says this because his fellow colleagues say the same, therefore he is biased.
The Platoon sergeant says, “The operation charged from a normal are to a scoop up operation”
This shows that he thinks they were in control. He says this because he is an army official and therefore he backs his friends up. He seems to be lying. You can tell this by his body language and attitude in my opinion.
The Adjutant also says it was a controlled operation. This shows that all the army people except the company Sergeant Major says it was a controlled operation. He says this because he is backing up what his colleagues said.
There are so many different interpretations; it is very hard to tell what really happened on that day. The historians are forced with big problems because they are left with two sides of the story and therefore do not know who to believe. It is a mixture between fact and opinion; therefore, it is hard to really find out the truth. There are people who favour different sides. Another problem is that the documentary favours the marchers this is demonstrated at the start when the camera focuses in on the murdered written on the gravestone. At the end, the historians are forced with two sides of the story, one favouring the army and the other favouring the marchers. They do not know the truth even after studying them both.