Kincora abuse campaigner hits out at inquiry in scathing letter
The man who attempted to expose the historical sex abuse at the notorious Kincora boys' home in Belfast has lambasted an inquiry in a scathing 14-page letter.
Former Army captain and intelligence officer Colin Wallace slammed the Historical Institutional Abuse (HIA) inquiry's report on the Kincora paedophile cover-up in the 1970s.
Mr Wallace, whose attempts to expose the abuse of young boys were overthrown by his superiors, has contacted the inquiry's solicitor, Patrick Butler, to raise concerns about what he claims are "factual inaccuracies and misleading information" in the report.
He disputes the information contained in the inquiry report about notorious child abuser and Kincora housemaster William McGrath and others in the child-abuse ring.
Mr Wallace refused to testify before the inquiry last year, saying that it did not have adequate powers to get answers.
Instead, he submitted a 45-page document about Kincora, which he claimed was partly redacted.
Mr Wallace has challenged the inquiry on how it dealt with the RUC, Ministry of Defence and intelligence services, who he maintains were using Kincora and McGrath for intelligence-gathering in the 1970s.
In the letter, Wallace put 11 questions to the HIA chairman Sir Anthony Hart concerning the way in which Government witnesses were dealt with.
Mr Wallace said: "I feel both angry and sorry that after 40 years of campaigning for a proper investigation of this matter, we are all further away from the truth than ever."
A spokeswoman for the HIA inquiry said that the inquiry devoted 119 pages to examining Mr Wallace's submission.
"Colin Wallace was offered the opportunity to assist on two occasions but chose not to do so," she said.
"He was also requested to provide a witness statement answering questions the inquiry considered relevant and to provide copies of certain documents but did not do so. The inquiry devoted 119 pages of its report to examining what Mr Wallace has said about Kincora. The inquiry does not intend to debate its findings with Mr Wallace."
The report posted on the HIA website criticises Mr Wallace's evidence about Kincora. It states: "Taking all matters into consideration we are satisfied that Mr Wallace cannot be regarded as truthful in his accounts of what he knew about sexual abuse in Kincora, or what he did with that knowledge, in 1972 to 1974."