Skip to content
© Copyright, Criminal Cases Review Commission 2026.

Northern Ireland Court of Appeal quashes man’s 1972 explosives convictions

Published:

The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal has quashed the convictions of Laurence O’Neill, who is 82, following a reference from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). 

In November 1971 Mr O’Neill was approached by two Scots Guards while in a car outside an address in Belfast. He claimed he was waiting for someone at the property. They denied knowing Mr O’Neill, and after his car was searched 700 rounds of ammunition were said to have been found in a concealed compartment on the driver’s side.   

The following day, his family farm was searched where a quantity of arms was found.  

After being transferred to Palace Barracks in Holywood, he was interrogated on six occasions with no solicitor present. He was subsequently medically examined, and several injuries were noted.   

A detective said they had spoken to Mr O’Neill, and he had admitted being fully responsible for the ammunition but had declined to make a written statement.  

Mr O’Neill was convicted in 1972 for possessing ammunition with intent, possessing ammunition without a certificate and possessing explosives with intent to endanger life. He was sentenced to a total of 15 years’ imprisonment.    

Mr O’Neill’s representatives applied to the CCRC in June 2019 which referred the case in April 2025 on the basis of executive misconduct, inadmissibility of confession evidence and insufficient evidence absent of a confession.  

Senior judges yesterday [25 February 2026] held that a failure to disclose medical evidence of injuries sustained by Mr O’Neill undermined the reliability of confession evidence.  

The Court accepted that the non-disclosure of medical evidence and interrogations had a cumulative effect of “tainting” the reliability of Mr O’Neill’s confessions. 

Describing the trial proceedings as “unconscionable”, Lady Chief Justice Dame Siobhan Keegan confirmed: “We could not properly conclude that the convictions are safe.” 

The Public Prosecution Service did not resist the appeal. 

Notes to Editor: 

  1. The CCRC is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for independently reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is based in Birmingham and is funded by the Ministry of Justice.     
  2. There are currently ten Commissioners who bring to the CCRC considerable experience from a wide variety of backgrounds. Commissioners are appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in accordance with the Office for the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice.  
  3. The CCRC usually receives around 1,600 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) each year. Since starting work in 1997, the CCRC has referred around 3% of applications to the appeal courts.     
  4. The CCRC considers whether, as a result of new evidence or argument, there is a real possibility that the conviction would not be upheld were a reference to be made. New evidence or argument is argument or evidence which has not been raised during the trial or on appeal.  Applicants should usually have appealed first. A case can be referred in the absence of new evidence or argument or an earlier appeal only if there are “exceptional circumstances”.       
  5. If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe.      
  6. More details about the role and work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission can be found at www.ccrc.gov.uk. The CCRC can be found on X, Facebook, Instagram (@the_ccrc) and Linkedin.