Member's statement: Omagh Bomb Inquiry
Member's statement by Mr Daniel McCrossan on .
- MLA
- Mr Daniel McCrossan
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 3 February 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Omagh Bomb Inquiry
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4773615
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As I stand here, the Omagh bomb inquiry is ongoing in Omagh. I attended it last week to meet the families of those who lost loved ones and suffered the worst possible consequences of what was the most horrendous day of our very dark past.
The pain, the anger, the frustration, the sense of loss and the void left by the lives that were stolen from many families in Omagh are acutely felt. Given what the Omagh families went through in order to get the inquiry, it is important that the House stand united today in thinking of all those who were affected: not just those who lost loved ones and those who died but the hundreds of people who were injured and the many others who were affected on that day.
With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I will read into the record the names of the 29 victims murdered by the Real IRA on that day. They were James Barker, aged 12; Fernando Baselga, aged 12; Geraldine Breslin, aged 43; Deborah Anne Cartwright, aged 20; Gareth Conway, aged 18; Breda Devine, aged 20 months; Oran Doherty, aged 8; Aidan Gallagher, aged 21; Esther Gibson, aged 36; Mary Grimes, aged 65; Olive Hawkes, aged 60; Julia Hughes, aged 21; Brenda Logue, aged 17; Ann McCombe, aged 45; Brian McCrory, aged 54; Samantha McFarland, aged 17; Sean McGrath, aged 61; Sean McLaughlin, aged 12; Jolene Marlow, aged 17; Avril Monaghan, aged 30, who was killed along with her unborn twins; Maura Monaghan, aged 18 months; Alan Radford, aged 16; Rocio Ramos, aged 23; Elizabeth Rush, aged 57; Veda Short, aged 46; Philomena Skelton, aged 39; Fred White, aged 60; Bryan White, aged 27; and Lorraine Wilson, aged 15. You can see from those names and ages, Mr Speaker, that so many lives were impacted on and so many were taken far too young. As I felt in the inquiry last week — I will attend it again this week — the pain is as acute today, and the void is so real for those families. We think on them as they share the stories of their journeys of such terrible and tremendous loss.
362 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.97).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.10 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.03 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.99 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:51 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.