On the second day of the Omagh bomb trial a senior defence lawyer claimed yesterday that a witness was "got at" before coming into court to give evidence, a senior defence lawyer claimed yesterday.
A row flared after the witness, a photographer, revealed new details about an unlocated timer power unit (TPU) from an explosion blamed on south Armagh electrician Seán Hoey.
Mr Hoey (37), denies a total of 58 terrorist-related offences, including 29 murders in the Real IRA Omagh atrocity. He also faces other charges of attacks on civilian, police and military targets.
Relatives and survivors are watching the trial by video link from Belfast Crown Court.
The second day was dominated by questions about a mortar attack on a police and army base in Forkhill, south Armagh, five months before the Omagh outrage.
Scene of crime officers who collected exhibits from the explosion site could not explain why a second TPU had not been recovered. But Peter Maile, a former soldier with 15 years' experience of photographing security scenes for police and military, told the non-jury trial that two pictures of bagged items showed a battery and the unit in question. During cross-examination by Orlando Pownall QC, defending, Mr Maile confirmed he had held talks with a junior prosecuting barrister after arriving at court.
When Mr Pownall checked if he had been asked about the photographs, the photographer replied that he had confirmed one depicted a TPU.
The London-based defence counsel expressed his astonishment that the conversation had taken place, insisting this was not common practice under English law.
Even though Gordon Kerr, prosecuting, stressed that the witness had offered the new information on the photographs without being asked, Mr Pownall refused to be placated.
He said: "We will submit that the account given by the witness is almost too good to be true, that he should volunteer that observation to the junior counsel in the circumstances described."
Mr Kerr responded by refuting any allegation that his junior counsel had acted improperly or had gone outside to prompt a witness. But Mr Pownall told him: "If that was my suggestion, I would have made that suggestion.
"The suggestion I will make in the fullness of time is a criticism of somebody else who got at that witness before he volunteered that evidence on the photographs relating to the TPU and battery."