Relatives of Stardust victims welcome another small step in their quest for answers

The families of 48 young people who died in the 1981 Stardust inferno have always had one primary demand – the truth about how and why their loved ones died.

More than 41 years on, and over three since former attorney general Séamus Woulfe agreed fresh inquests should be held into the deaths, they dare to hope that might now begin to emerge.

The blaze that engulfed the Stardust nightclub in Dublin’s Artane in the early hours of February 14th, 1981 killed 48 people aged between 16 and 26 and seriously injured 128 more. No one has been held responsible, no apology or remorse has ever been expressed, and no cause has been found. A finding of ‘probable arson’ in the 1981 tribunal of inquiry chaired by Justice Ronan Keane was rejected by the families.

That finding was erased from the record in 2009 though no further inquiry was recommended, leaving the families and their communities still looking for answers as they harboured an ongoing sense of injustice. Further campaigning resulted in the decision by Mr Woulfe that there was a strong public interest in holding fresh inquests. It remains unclear whether they will get underway before Christmas.

Bryan Dobson: ‘Suddenly I was on the wrong side of the police line ... these fellas came after me into a forest’

---

I spent my maternity leave in a chemo chair. Then I got a letter telling me to go back to work

---

Trump’s week in court: Gasps and a pick-up in pace as Hope Hicks is called

---

The Croke Park effect: ‘It was one of the very few times I cried during the opposition anthem’

---

Antoinette Keegan, who survived the fire but lost her sisters Mary (19) and Martina (16), and who has campaigned for four decades for justice for the 48, said there was “no reason to wait any longer”. She expects the inquests, which will open with “pen portraits” of the victims read into the record by families, to start in the coming weeks.

[ Challenge over new inquest into Stardust deaths rejected by High Court ]

“Everything should get up and running now. We are all ready to go,” she said. “We just need the coroner [Dr Myra Cullinane] now to sit down and set a date.”

On Wednesday Mr Justice Charles Meenan in the High Court ruled “unlawful killing” should be available to the jury in the inquests, rejecting an application by former Stardust manager Eamon Butterly to have it excluded as a possible verdict.

Mr Butterly argued he could be the target of such a verdict. Mr Justice Meenan, however, said while the verdict was rightfully included as an option it could only be returned where no person was identified or identifiable.

A senior legal source familiar with contentious inquests, who did not wish to be named, said achieving a verdict of ‘unlawful killing’ required a standard of proof ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

“So, it is not just the balance of probabilities that is the case with other verdicts like ‘misadventure’. It is a criminal level. ‘Unlawful killing’ means by its very nature criminal law has been contravened. There is going to be a very high bar for anyone to reach.”

Whether, in the event of such a verdict being returned, criminal proceedings would follow would be a matter then for the Director of Public Prosecutions and the amount of time that has passed would certainly be an issue.

[ Memorials unveiled to victims of Stardust and Covid-19 ]

“The director might decide ‘no prosecution’ is possible at this remove. If the DPP decides not to prosecute the effectiveness and independence [of investigations into deaths required under European Court of Human Rights rules] would require that the DPP give detailed reasons.”

On Wednesday afternoon families were not focused on possible prosecutions or implications of liability, but rather on just getting on with the inquests. “The verdicts will be for someone else,” said Maurice McHugh. He and his wife Phyliss lost their only child Caroline (17) in the disaster. “The ruling is very welcome. We have been fighting for these inquests to get underway since 2019. What we want to achieve is to know how the fire started that night, what happened to our children. We hope to get started now and get answers.”

Carole Barrett’s brother Michael (17) was DJing that night at the Stardust. “We want to know how and why Michael died. Why could they not get out of that building? If you can access a building you should be able to exit it, irrespective of what happened,” she said.

Lisa Lawlor, who was 17 months when her parents Maureen and Francis were killed, said she “could not be any more delighted” that the inquests look set to get underway.

Neither Mr Butterly nor his solicitor could be contacted for comment. Asked when the inquests would start, spokeswoman for Dr Cullinane, said: “It is not possible at present to comment until the completion of the formal judicial review process”.

Whatever the eventual verdict, the families will learn much about what happened that night, including what might have been if things had been done differently in areas such as planning, licensing, management of the premises, and in the aftermath.

“They could get their Bloody Sunday moment,” said the legal source. “They could walk out of there with the verdict they want, and they will certainly have the weight of public opinion on their side. Often the inquest is not the end. In some ways it marks the beginning of the next phase.”