Dying Troubles veteran ‘treated like a terrorist’
Troubles veteran Dennis Hutchings says his final days are being made ‘hell’ by legacy trial he faces
A dying Army veteran facing trial for attempted murder over the shooting of a man during the Troubles has told how the case has made his final years “a total hell”. Dennis Hutchings, 78, is undergoing dialysis three times a week but faces the prospect of a trial in Northern Ireland. The Supreme Court has denied him the right to a trial by jury. Mr Hutchings told The Daily Telegraph from hospital in Plymouth that he felt he was being treated “like a terrorist”.
DENNIS HUTCHINGS is dying; his heart is failing and now his kidneys have packed up.
Since last week, he has been on kidney dialysis, travelling an hour to hospital to spend the next five hours having his blood cleaned, wired up to a machine that is keeping him alive. Just.
But with his health failing, Mr Hutchings, a 78-year-old Army veteran, is also facing trial for attempted murder over the death of a man shot during the Troubles 45 years ago.
Mr Hutchings, a former staff sergeant in The Life Guards, faces the prospect of a trial held in Northern Ireland, interrupted every two days for him to attend hospital to be hooked up to a dialysis machine.
The disclosure that a former soldier is still being dragged through the courts, despite facing a serious illness, will cause further outrage at a time when the Government is under pressure to drop the so-called “witch hunt” of veterans who served in Northern Ireland.
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Mr Hutchings, who lives in Cawsand in Cornwall, said: “It’s a bloody, utter disgrace they are still pursuing me. It’s disgusting. This is making my final years a total hell. The doctors say my life expectancy isn’t good. My consultant thinks I should be dead anyway by now.”
Mr Hutchings, who served 26 years in the Army, had delayed dialysis, hoping to put off the medical intervention until he could clear his name at the trial.
However, he can no longer wait after doctors concluded he had “progressed to end stage renal failure requiring dialysis”.
Mr Hutchings invited The Telegraph into his hospital room in Plymouth to highlight the serious illness he faces that requires dialysis three times a week.
The ex-soldier was the first veteran to be charged over deaths in Northern Ireland since police began looking at “legacy” cases.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court denied him the right to a trial by jury, deciding his case will be heard by a judge alone – under rules introduced during the Troubles to deal with paramilitary and terrorist offences.
Mr Hutchings said: “I haven’t got very good life chances going forward because of all my health problems with my kidneys and my heart.
“I will have to go to trial in Northern Ireland and every other day go to hospital for dialysis.
“The dialysis lasts five hours, plus 20 minutes at the beginning to connect me up and 20 minutes to disconnect.
“They plug you up to a machine that takes the blood out of your body, cleans it and puts it back. It’s the job your kidneys would normally do but, of course, mine are just about finished. The dialysis also takes out excess fluids which is also what the kidneys used to do. If I don’t have the dialysis, the fluid builds up and ends up in the lungs.” He says that by being deprived of a jury trial, he is being treated “like a terrorist”.
Mr Hutchings was on patrol in County Armagh, Northern Ireland, in June 1974 when John Patrick Cunningham, who was 27 and had learning difficulties, was shot and killed as he ran away.
Mr Hutchings insists that he fired into the air to try to get Mr Cunningham to stop. Prosecutors have admitted that it is “equally possible” that a second soldier – referred to as Soldier B and who has since died – had fired the fatal shot.
Mr Hutchings said: “There is no forensic evidence to show what killed John Pat Cunningham. Otherwise I would be charged with murder.”
He added: “I didn’t have any intention of killing Cunningham. I just wanted to get him to stop. I fired air shots. All I wanted to do was stop him and ask him why he was running. Our job was to protect people.”
Mr Hutchings had faced inquiries in the aftermath of the shooting in 1974 but was cleared of any wrongdoing at the time and told that he would face no further action.
However, in 2015 he was arrested and taken to a police station in County Antrim for three days of questioning by officers. It is not clear when his trial, due to be held in Belfast, will take place. Mr Cunningham’s family have welcomed the Supreme Court decision. Lawyers representing the family have said: “This will be a fair trial before a judge and will be about justice, not retribution.”
‘It’s a bloody, utter disgrace they are still pursuing me. It’s disgusting. This is making my final years a total hell’
Our interview with Dennis Hutchings, a 78-year-old Army veteran facing prosecution over the death of a man killed in Northern Ireland 45 years ago, captures the unfairness of what is going on. A former staff sergeant in the Life Guards, who served Queen and country for 26 years, Mr Hutchings has heart problems and his kidneys have failed, requiring regular hospital visits for dialysis treatment.
He is a dying man; and at the end of his life he is being pursued through the courts for something that happened so long ago there can be little, if any, prospect of a credible case being constructed against him given the passage of time and the paucity of evidence.
There are those who say British soldiers cannot be above the law and have no exemption from the consequences of their actions. In Mr Hutchings case, it is alleged that while on patrol in Co Armagh in 1974 he attempted to murder John Cunningham, 27, while he was running away.
Mr Hutchings says he fired a warning shot in the air and prosecutors have conceded that a second soldier who has since died might have fired the fatal shot. There are other requirements of justice, among them the realistic prospect of a conviction which after so long is difficult to imagine, especially if a jury were asked to decide. However, this will not be tested before a jury since the Supreme Court recently ruled the case should proceed before a judge sitting alone.
There is also the question of the public interest: how is that served by putting a dying man in the dock? For Mr Hutchings, his remaining time is to be spent in hospital or court, “It is a bloody utter disgrace,” he says. It is impossible to disagree.