A FORMER RUC constable who was cleared on appeal of murdering his wife and father in law was guilty in the eyes of some members of the public, the High Court in Belfast was told yesterday.
And the majority of former colleagues of Mr Alan Anderson thought it was only a judge's misdirection to a jury which kept him out of prison, a senior officer said.
These claims were made in an affidavit sworn by RUC Deputy Chief Constable, Mr Ronnie Flanagan, supporting the decision of Sir Hugh Annesley to sack Mr Anderson last December.
Mr Anderson was sacked three months after the Court of Appeal quashed his convictions of murdering his estranged wife Judith and her father, Rev Eric Davidson, at their home in Cookstown, Co Tyrone, in December, 1992.
Mi Anderson (37), who is seeking a judicial review of his sacking, was not in court yesterday when his lawyers lost an application for access to papers in his case.
Mr Flanagan's affidavit said the Chief Constable had noted that Mr Anderson had not been acquitted of either of the murder charges by any court or jury and the Court of Appeal had made no comment as to his guilt or innocence. It continued: "In considering the general interest of the efficiency of the force, the Chief Constable had regard to the likely impact which the applicant's return to service would have on his fellow officers.
"The Chief Constable's assessment was that, in the perception of a majority of fellow officers, the applicant had been found guilty of two murders by a jury but was avoiding imprisonment because of a ruling by the Court of Appeal that the trial judge's direction to the jury was inadequate in one particular respect."
Mr Flanagan said the Chief Constable envisaged that fellow officers might refuse to work with Mr Anderson or would not co operate or communicate properly with him.
"The information available to the Chief Constable indicated that, at a local level particularly, strong feelings hostile to the applicant were held by many fellow officers," stated Mr Flanagan.
"He considered that a significant proportion of the public, both locally and further abroad, would find it offensive if the applicant were to resume police service.
"In the Chief Constable's estimation, members of the public were entitled, notwithstanding the Court of Appeal ruling, to hold an opinion about the applicant's guilt or innocence of the murders.
"The Chief Constable's estimation was that a significant proportion of the public would suspect the applicant's guilt or believe him guilty."
Mr Flanagan said for these reasons and having considered all the circumstances of the case, the Chief Constable was of the opinion that Mr Anderson was on suited for continued service.
Mr Justice Kerr said it was hoped the substantive application could be heard next month.