A Republican cleared of the murder of two British soldiers has claimed his DNA was planted in the getaway car.
Colin Duffy was acquitted on Friday of murdering Mark Quinsey (23) and Patrick Azimkar (21) at Massereene Barracks in March 2009.
The 44-year-old from Lurgan was found not guilty of nine charges related to the deaths but his co-accused Brian Shivers, terminally ill with cystic fibrosis, was convicted on all counts and received a life sentence.
Speaking at a press conference over the weekend, Duffy denied he was ever in the getaway car and repeated his claim that he had nothing to do with the deaths of the young solders in the County Antrim attack.
Dying IRA dissident convicted of murder of two British soldiers - VIDEO
Unfaithful at large - 40 percent of Irish people have had an affair
Irish prophet Saint Malachy predicts Benedict XVI is the second to last Pope
The presiding judge had told the court that he was satisfied that Duffy’s DNA had been found on a latex glove tip inside the car and on a seat buckle, but the prosecution had failed to link the defendant to the murder plot.
Duffy was then freed after spending the last three years in prison and proclaimed his innocence on his release.
“Let me state quite categorically here that I had no involvement with what happened at Massereene - no involvement whatsoever - and that has been vindicated in the court,” said Duffy.
“There was no credible evidence to suggest otherwise. I was never in that car.
“My position has been, from the word ‘go’, that my DNA, was in my opinion, planted there.”
The Real IRA claimed responsibility for the attack on Massereene Barracks that left Quinsey and Azimkar dead just hours before they were due to travel to Afghanistan.
Duffy may now seek redress from the British government after he was cleared of all charges.
He also admitted to a West Belfast news conference that he is proud to classify himself as a dissident Republican.
“If being a dissident means opposing Sinn Féin’s peace strategy then I am happy to classify myself as such,” added Duffy.
“I have no questions to answer in this case. I did not need to answer to the spurious evidence or so-called evidence that they were adducing at the trial.
“The decision not to give evidence was a decision that we took on the basis of my view legally of how the case was going.”