On Thursday, Judge Patrick Lynch delivered a verdict at Belfast Crown Court, concluding that the prosecution failed to establish that the former soldier, known as “Soldier F,” fired upon fleeing civilians who were unarmed.

Soldier F denied charges related to the murders of James Wray, 22, and William McKinney, 27, as well as five counts of attempted murder involving Joseph Friel, Michael Quinn, Joe Mahon, Patrick O’Donnell, and firing at unarmed individuals.

In the nonjury trial, the judge determined that the prosecution’s evidence was significantly insufficient for a conviction.

This outcome, highlighting the prosecution’s reliance on inadequate evidence, was disheartening for the victims’ families, who have pursued justice for over fifty years.

The former lance corporal faced accusations of two murders and five attempted murders.

Prosecutors said that he fired at fleeing demonstrators on January 20, 1972 in Londonderry, also known as Derry, when 13 people were killed and 15 others were wounded in the deadliest shooting of the period known as “The Troubles”.

The event has come to symbolise the conflict between mainly Catholic supporters of a united Ireland and predominantly Protestant forces that wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom.

The killings were a source of shame for a British government that had initially claimed that members of a parachute regiment fired in self-defense after being attacked by gunmen and people hurling firebombs.

While the violence largely ended with the 1998 Good Friday peace accord, tensions remain.

Families of civilians killed continue to press for justice, while supporters of army veterans complain that their losses have been downplayed and that they have been unfairly targeted in investigations.

Soldier F, who was shrouded from view in court by a curtain throughout the five-week trial, didn’t testify in his defence and his lawyer presented no evidence.

The soldier told police during a 2016 interview that he had no “reliable recollection” of the events that day, but was sure he had properly discharged his duties as a soldier.

Defence lawyer Mark Mulholland attacked the prosecution’s case as “fundamentally flawed and weak” for relying on soldiers he dubbed “fabricators and liars” and the fading memories of survivors who scrambled to avoid live gunfire that some mistakenly thought were rounds of rubber bullets.

Surviving witnesses spoke of the confusion, chaos and terror as soldiers opened fire and bodies began falling after a large civil rights march through the city.

The prosecution relied on statements by two of Soldier F’s comrades — Soldier G, who is dead, and Soldier H, who refused to testify.

The defence tried unsuccessfully to exclude the hearsay statements, because they couldn’t be cross-examined.

Prosecutor Louis Mably argued that the soldiers, without justification, had all opened fire, intending to kill, and thus shared responsibility for the casualties.

A formal inquiry cleared the troops of responsibility, but a subsequent and lengthier review in 2010 found soldiers shot unarmed civilians fleeing and then lied in a cover-up that lasted for decades.

Then prime minister David Cameron apologised and said that the killings were “unjustified and unjustifiable”.

The 2010 findings cleared the way for the eventual prosecution of Soldier F, though delays and setbacks kept it from coming to trial until last month.