Colin was at home the night of the attack at Massereene

Today, Colin's wife Martine gave evidence at his trial.

Martine said her husband had not left the house at all on the night of the attack on the barracks.

She told the court, sitting at Antrim, that her husband Colin had been playing the Xbox at home with some of his four children the night of the  attack. They had been recovering after attending a wedding the evening before.

She said she remembered that day well, because the couple had been at a friend's wedding the day before.  Photographs of Colin and Martine at the wedding were shown to the court.

She said they remained at home with the children because they were tired after the wedding.

Text messages from Colin's phone to Martine's phone and from Martine's phone to Colin's phone on the night of the attack were shown to the court.  The messages confirmed Martine's evidence that Colin had been at home on the night of the attack.

Martine said she thought the attack on Massereene was "absolutely terrible".

She said she believed those responsible should be caught before adding: "It's awful that my husband should be accused of it".

Earlier today, a barrister for Colin reiterated the claim made by the prosecution that police had "reliable information" that a son of leading republican Dominic McGlinchey was the getaway driver during the Massereene barracks attack.

He said police had "reliable information" and questioned Dominic and Declan McGlinchey about the attack on Massereene. Both were released.

Referring to a statement made to the court, defence barrister Barry MacDonald QC said: "Police hold reliable information to indicate that a son of Dominic McGlinchey Snr was the driver of the vehicle which was subsequently recovered by police and was used in the fatal shooting of two soldiers."

Summing-up by the prosecution 

Prosecution barrister Terence Mooney QC later began his summing-up of the case.

He said there could be no innocent explanation for the discovery of Duffy's DNA on a latex glove tip found in the getaway car.

"It is illogical and nonsensical that, of all the items found in the car, the only one to be excluded from the attack is the tip of a latex glove," he said.

"The latex glove, taking into account the implications from its presence in the car, is obviously linked to the attack.

"It was obviously present and had become detached from a glove worn by a terrorist who is trying to prevent traces of forensic material which could make a link between the terrorist and the car itself and the attack."

He said the presence of the DNA clearly called for an explanation from Duffy but none had been given.

"The absence of an explanation being given by Duffy is attributed to him having no answer that would stand up to cross-examination," Mr Mooney said.

Summing-up by Colin's defence

Barry McDonald said that there's such a complete absence of evidence against Colin that the prosecution don't know what case to make against him. 

He said that Colin wasn't a "gunman" nor the driver of the car and that inviting the judge to draw an inference from Colin failing to take the stand was dangerous and entering miscarriage of justice teritory.

Barry McDonald said that the judge had to weigh up the "imponderable" factor of his own subconscious attitude towards Colin.

"It would be to ignore the elephant in the room if I were not to draw attention to the dangers that can arise in circumstances such as this case where the court is invited, your lordship, to stretch and draw inferences to the extent that your lordship has been invited to do."  he said. 

He said the DNA evidence could not prove when the latex glove allegedly containing Colin's DNA had been left in the car.

He said prosecutors had attributed no role in the attack to his client.

Instead he said Mr Justice Anthony Hart was being asked to draw adverse inference from Colin's failure to testify.

                                                                                                                                                                           Defence barrister Barry McDonald

"It is a further indication that the route that the court is inviting your lordship to go down is replete with danger." Mr McDonald said.

"It has miscarriage of justice all over it and if your lordship draws the inference that the crown is asking you to draw solely or mainly from the fact that Mr Duffy for whatever reason has declined to get into the box and justify himself there is a real risk that there will be a miscarriage of justice in this case. 

"There is simply no evidence upon which this court could properly conclude that Mr Duffy was involved in any way in this attack and for that reason he should be acquitted."

The trial continues.