Lurgan

[Truth hurts]

LATEST | Natalie McNally murder probe: 'Doubled-gloved' suspect captured on CCTV in various locations, say police
Police last month returned to the scene at Silverwood Green where Stephen McCullagh (inset) is accused of murdering Natalie McNally.
Police last month returned to the scene at Silverwood Green where Stephen McCullagh (inset) is accused of murdering Natalie McNally.

Allison Morris
Belfast Telegraph
Today at 06:30
A suspect in the Natalie McNally murder investigation left his home on the day of the killing and got a bus to Lurgan, a court has heard.
Details of movements which police believe were taken by Stephen McCullagh on the day in question were outlined at Lisburn Magistrates Court.

It is based on CCTV footage taken in various locations on the bus and in Lurgan.

McCullagh is alleged to have left his home in the Woodland Gardens area of Lisburn on the afternoon of Sunday December 18.

The journey police say the suspect took to and from Natalie's Silverwood Green home was given in detail during a failed bail application by McCullagh (32).

The court was told that a man fitting the description of the suspect is seen walking from the Lisburn direction towards a bus stop at Kingsway, Dunmurry, where he waits for 15 minutes.


The man has the hood of his coat pulled down and a mask covering his face.

He is carrying a "distinctive" Asda bag for life which police believe contained a black bag later seen on CCTV.

The man drops change getting onto the bus and as he bends to pick it up removes a black glove that shows a yellow glove underneath.

"He is double gloved," Detective Chief Inspector Neil McGuinness told Lisburn Magistrates Court.

A Marigold glove print was found in blood at the scene of Ms McNally's death.


During the journey the man is seen on the bus camera sitting motionless, only once lifting his mask from below to take a drink of Coca Cola, rather than pull it down.



He walks past the town's war memorial and police station, still carrying the Asda bag.

He walks past Lurgan railway station into Lough Road and then is seen at 8.42pm walking past the junction leading to the Silverwood Green development where Natalie lived.

The person disappears out of sight for 10 minutes and then returns, without the bag for life. The person is then seen carrying a black rucksack captured on CCTV at 8.52pm.


It is the police belief that this person enters Natalie's address at Silverwood Green.

He leaves at 9.30pm but has changed clothing, although detectives believe the person — who they contend to be McCullagh — is recognisable by his "distinctive gait".

The suspect is seen again at various points walking along Lough Road, William Street and into Lurgan town centre.

The suspect then approaches a Fonacab taxi that was ordered on the App by a person which is waiting at Fa Joe's Bar.

The driver told police he was booked to take a fare to an address in Lurgan.


However, the person asks to be taken to Lisburn, claiming his mother is ill and there had been a change of plan.

Fonacab then received a call from the person who had booked the taxi, saying his cab had not shown up.

Police believe the person opportunistically took another person's taxi.

The taxi's GPRS tracking showed that the taxi dropped the person outside McCullagh's home at 11.13pm.

Three minutes later McCullagh's mobile phone, which had not been used in over five hours, is swiped open and activated.

[imtommygunn]

The  worst part of this now it is unravelling is how pre-meditated it seems to have been. Awful.

[Milltown Row2]

You do wonder in this day and age of tech, cameras, DNA identification, media coverage, and so on that people feel that they will out fox the police.

Hopefully the family don't go through a hearing

[imtommygunn]

Some people think they are significantly more clever than they are. You see it everywhere.

You can now see why it took the length of time it did to nab the guy.

[Smokin Joe]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

What was the deliberate contaminating the crime scene actions? I don't think I read about that in the reports.

[quit yo jibbajabba]

Someone posted that a near identical plot was used on a CSI episode couple years back. Laddo thinkin he could pull off the perfect crime eh

[Kidder81]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

What was the deliberate contaminating the crime scene actions? I don't think I read about that in the reports.

Think that was letting her cats and dog run round the place. Could be wrong

[Milltown Row2]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

What was the deliberate contaminating the crime scene actions? I don't think I read about that in the reports.

Think that was letting her cats and dog run round the place. Could be wrong

In the report he was the one that found her so he'd have been in the house at that point!

Its chilling, hopefully he hasn't done this elsewhere and well done to the detectives on this case

[seafoid]

A high percentage of femicides are carried out by men known to the victim. He was suspect no. 1 but he had an alibi.
When the investigation drew up a blank the police had to test his alibi. This is a job well done. It's so important to bring perpetrators to trial.

[Walter Cronc]

So hes not the boyfriend then?

Make the hair on the back of your neck stand reading that.

God love her and her family!

[imtommygunn]

Where did you read that Walter? This whole thing is completely bonkers. Well tbh one person in it is completely bonkers. Utter madness. I wonder how he was with family etc. Completely insane.

Also you still wonder will they be able to pin it on this guy 

[David McKeown]

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn't banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can't discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

The warnings are from the Attorney General's Office.  I'm sure they have quite a lot more experience of what can jeopardise a legal conviction that anyone on here.

Yes I read the guidance from the English Attorney General's Office I'm not convinced it will all be applicable here.

[seafoid]

Do such  warnings also apply pre trial ?

[Walter Cronc]

Where did you read that Walter? This whole thing is completely bonkers. Well tbh one person in it is completely bonkers. Utter madness. I wonder how he was with family etc. Completely insane.

Also you still wonder will they be able to pin it on this guy 

Sorry lad I typed that wrong. Was referring to that article truth hurts posted as scary!

Dunno if he was a bf or not.

[seafoid]

Where did you read that Walter? This whole thing is completely bonkers. Well tbh one person in it is completely bonkers. Utter madness. I wonder how he was with family etc. Completely insane.

Also you still wonder will they be able to pin it on this guy 

Sorry lad I typed that wrong. Was referring to that article truth hurts posted as scary!

Dunno if he was a bf or not.

Bel Tel said he met the parents twice.