The family of murdered greengrocer Harry Holland met with the Attorney General, yesterday (Wednesday) to discuss their deep concerns about the sentences given to those involved in his murder.

 Following the meeting, the family said that there are still a number of questions about the case that need to be answered.

 Popular local businessman Harry was murdered near his West Belfast home in September 2007.

In July, Stephen McKee (18) from Ballymurphy Road was told that he must serve at least 12 years of a life sentence.

Patrick Crossan from Willowbank Gardens received a four-year sentence for attempted affray and having an offensive weapon. Crossan (19) has since been released from prison. 

A 17-year-old female was given two years probation for affray and common assault in relation to the Harry Holland case.

Yesterday, the Holland family, accompanied by West Belfast MP Gerry Adams and their lawyer, Michael Flanigan, met with Attorney General Baroness Scotland at the Bar Library in Belfast city centre.

During the meeting the Holland family told the Attorney General that they did not believe that the charges fitted the crime. They also made it clear that they were not in agreement with the fact that the charges of murder originally put to Patrick Crossan and the 17-year old female were reduced to affray and common assault. The family firmly believes that at the very least unlawful killing or manslaughter charges should have been put to the two defendants.

During the meeting,  Harry’s daughter, Sarah,  raised the matter of the case being referred by the PPS to the Attorney General without consultation with the family and claimed that this was contrary to the PPS’s own code of ethnics.

Speaking after the meeting Sarah said: “We wanted answers on why the charges didn’t fit the crime and we didn’t get those answers today,” she said.

 “We outlined our concerns and we said that we wanted a full exposition of the facts around any deals that had been made, it was a bit of a whitewash really. I suppose we didn’t expect to go in and get a full exposition of the facts right away.”

Sarah said that they still want answers on why the decision was made to drop murder charges against two of the defendants and replace them with charges of affray and common assault. She said the family need to know who endorsed this decision.

“We sat for an hour with the top legal team, including the Attorney General, and whilst we were pleased with her agreement to reflect on the case, we still left without straight answers to the questions we had,” she added.

Harry’s sister, Geraldine McAteer, said: “The Attorney General explained from her perspective that she had examined the case and had examined the charges, but we were still not satisfied with the explanation that we were given by her or by the other legal representatives there.

“We are still very firmly of the view that the murder charges that were dropped against two people should have been replaced with substantive charges such as manslaughter or unlawful killing.

 “We feel it was completely inappropriate to reduce murder charges right down to affray and common assault and we are still not content with the performance of the Public Prosecution Service in letting that go ahead.”

Geraldine welcomed the fact that the Attorney General has said she will reflect on the case.

“We now have agreement from her officials that we will have access to the papers relating to our brother’s case, in very much the same way that the prosecution and defence teams did,” she added.

Speaking after the meeting, West Belfast MP Gerry Adams said: “It was and is our view that the PPS did not handle the Harry Holland case properly.”

He said that there is huge public concern about this.

“The Holland family made a compelling case to the British Attorney General about the inadequate way the PPS dealt with this case and in particular the way in which the charges against two of those involved were reduced,” he said.

“The British Attorney General and PPS agreed to reflect on the points put to them by the family and to come back to them.

“They also accepted the need for greater transparency within the judicial system and in particular how it engages with victims and their families,” he added.

Mr Adams said that they intend to follow up on all these issues.