'No evidence' that man who stole Noah's laptop was involved in disappearance

A lawyer for the family of Noah Donohoe has been told there is no evidence which would link the man who found the schoolboy's rucksack with his disappearance.

The 14-year-old schoolboy's body was found in a water tunnel six days after his disappearance in north Belfast in June 2020.

The family barrister was challenged over the issue at the inquest on Friday.

Daryl Paul was subsequently jailed for stealing a laptop from the teenager's bag.

The inquest had previously been told that CCTV evidence shows that Paul could not have had any contact with the schoolboy between the time Noah left his home in south Belfast until he disappeared.

The Donohoe family lawyer has previously stated that the matter is not being contested.

On Friday, PSNI Detective Chief Inspector Sam McCallum, who was part of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) probe into the schoolboy's disappearance, returned to the inquest to complete his evidence.

The witness was questioned by the Donohoe family barrister about matters relating to Noah's phone.

The schoolboy had discarded or become parted from his phone shortly before he disappeared.

However, a photo of part of a hand was recorded on the phone within an hour of Noah's disappearance, and the Donohoe family barrister told the inquest about the possibility that the phone "was on the move" after Noah went missing.

She said Noah's mother, Fiona Donohoe, wanted to know how this could potentially have happened and if someone was in possession of the phone at that time.

The lawyer also explored the possibility that someone could have had Noah's coat, which is still missing, and if the phone could have been in either the bag or the coat when the device was tracked in the area after the boy's disappearance.

"Who had the child's phone", she asked.

The lawyer questioned Det Chief Insp McCallum about the police investigations into the matter.

She specifically asked him if the police investigation explored the possibility that the phone could have been in Noah's bag when it was found and taken by Daryl Paul, and if that question was posed to Paul.

McCallum said the police were aware of the missing phone at the time, but their primary focus was on finding Noah.

Explaining why the search for the schoolboy had a greater priority than finding the phone, he said: "We would have been following the phone instead of the person".

When the Donohoe family barrister pursued a line of questioning around the possibility of Daryl Paul being in possession of Noah's phone or the boy's coat, a barrister for Paul interjected to raise an objection to the line of questioning.

Paul's barrister told the coroner Mr Justice Rooney and the jury that there is no evidence to support any involvement on the part of his client in Noah's disappearance.

Commenting on the previous line of questioning, he said, "There are lots of hints" and "constant references" to Paul without any evidence.

Responding to the lawyer's interjection, Rooney told the hearing, "He's quite right, there isn't any evidence".

The Donohoe family barrister agreed that there was no evidence, but she insisted it was "legitimate" to explore issues around the matter adding, "I'm not trying to do Mr Paul any harm at all".

When Paul's barrister subsequently asked the police witness to describe Paul's manner when he was being questioned about finding Noah's bag, Det Chief Insp McCallum replied, "I would say, forthcoming".

The witness was later asked by a barrister for the PSNI if there was any evidence of third-party involvement in Noah's disappearance.

McCallum replied, "None whatsoever".

The PSNI barrister also pointed out that during five months of hearings at the inquest there has been no evidence of any third-party involvement.

Commenting on previous criticism of the PSNI over the absence of statements from some people who had come forward to provide information to the police about the case, the witness agreed that it is not unusual for some people to come forward with information without having to provide a statement.

The lawyer acting for the PSNI went on to point out "without any criticism" that the next of kin had not provided a statement to the police despite providing "a great deal of very important information".